oldkey Posted January 28, 2007 Report Share Posted January 28, 2007 ...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldkey Posted January 28, 2007 Report Share Posted January 28, 2007 ......... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
powell1.8 Posted January 28, 2007 Report Share Posted January 28, 2007 From what I remeber from photo classes, and some recent chairlift talk, is apperature has a lot to do with depth of field. Larger depth of feild=less time trying to fucus. I would think that if you are close to your subjects, shutter speed matching would be more important than apperature. So one of the two photos is not streaky. With fast enough film I think shutter speed would be less of an issue. Take it for what it's worth, its been a long time since class. I do know shooting on snow is really hard, and also hard for cameras to read correctly. There seems to be a lot of trial and error involved to get really good. Hope they turn out! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobble Posted January 28, 2007 Author Report Share Posted January 28, 2007 From what I remeber from photo classes, and some recent chairlift talk, is apperature has a lot to do with depth of field. Larger depth of feild=less time trying to fucus. I would think that if you are close to your subjects, shutter speed matching would be more important than apperature. So one of the two photos is not streaky. With fast enough film I think shutter speed would be less of an issue. Take it for what it's worth, its been a long time since class. I do know shooting on snow is really hard, and also hard for cameras to read correctly. There seems to be a lot of trial and error involved to get really good. Hope they turn out! yeah, i'm new at film SLR cameras. someday, digital SLR. the thing was troubling me today was why there would be a difference is exposure measurements. i kept comparing each camera to the same focal point, those slalom posts and yet they registered differently. i think i should have gone used the same f/stop and shutter settings as the one with the lower exposure reading - better to be under than over exposed. i tried it on a few. then i did it where i compensated for the exposure. i'm hoping more will turn out than last time. i had sync problems that i believed were due to the autofocus function. today i used the autofocus to calibrate the lens on the posts, then turned it to manual. i had no mis-fires like last time. someone at work who's a photographer was telling me i should be using 200 speed film. thats what i used today. he was saying that faster film just picks up noise and is grainy. today the shutter speed with 200 ISO was about 1/750th of a second. i love that "profiles in courage" shot of me. thanks oldkey. i'm sure that was the run where i overcorrected and went back up the hill. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
powell1.8 Posted January 29, 2007 Report Share Posted January 29, 2007 One thing you could also try is getting a external light meter. I know the light meters in cameras are not always the best, thats why you see photographers running around with light meters. External meters are much more accurate. Then you could set both your cameras off that reading. Way back when I was shooting snowboard shots in high school my photo instructor had us use ISO 400. Faster film+smaller apperature=less focusing. I don't think there would be a problem with graininess untill you get really fast film or you are blowing the pictures up really big. I honestly always thought ISO 400 was about the minimum for action shots. I have been letting my sister use my photo equipment for some classes she has been taking, but I may have to get it back, all the photography you guys have been doing is kind of inspiring. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Speedzilla Posted January 29, 2007 Report Share Posted January 29, 2007 Dave, if you want to give me a place to put them. But....I could really use some help getting these massive files down to a size small enough to get here on bomber without losing quality.Matt Matt, Shoot me an e-mail and I'll send you the FTP info. I've got about 25gb of unused web space at the moment. dave -at- speedzilla.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trent Posted January 29, 2007 Report Share Posted January 29, 2007 matt, awesome picts! thanks for bearing the cold to take them. i love the one of the cord. when i saw you laying down on the snow, i thought you were crazy because of the temp today. very cool pict. and the one of karl, with the gate still on the snow. nice timing! -trent Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corduroy Artisan Posted January 29, 2007 Report Share Posted January 29, 2007 Sorry i missed this. I look forward to meeting Y'all. I was supposed to play hockey with some old friends at 11 so I bagged the idea of going out for gates inthe cold at Buck. The call came at 10:30 that everyone was staying home to try on little girls clothes...I shoulda gone riding!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scuff Posted January 29, 2007 Report Share Posted January 29, 2007 Thanks Trent for arranging the time with Buck. Jessie and I had great fun today, and I learned loads just being on a different hill! Blue skies, and limited hill traffic today due to the -4º morning temps. I'd be all-for a repeat of today if possible... all except the frigid arctic air. The last MN USASA Alpine event is next weekend - Feb 3rd, at Wild Mtn, After that, it's USASA Nationals the 1st week in April. Thanks Matt for photos! Glad Patrick could come out and play before hitting the books. I don't get nearly enough time to actually "talk" with him during our regular practices. Bobble: Re: Little skier-train vs Bob's glove - Yes, It *WAS* a pretty funny sight from the top. You looked soooo angry. Ha Ha.. Hope the pics turned out! ~Karl Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldkey Posted January 29, 2007 Report Share Posted January 29, 2007 ....and get the photos loaded. Found a couple of other fun ones. They look so much better before I compress them..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobble Posted January 29, 2007 Author Report Share Posted January 29, 2007 Bobble: Re: Little skier-train vs Bob's glove - Yes, It *WAS* a pretty funny sight from the top. You looked soooo angry. Ha Ha.. Hope the pics turned out! ~Karl yeah, i was ticked. i was more ticked at the instructor. it meant i had to reset the cameras. i get no respect... not even from little kids. bad things are always happening to me. i think karma is telling me i gotta start doing good things. i better start making a list of all my bad deeds. my name is bob. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobble Posted January 30, 2007 Author Report Share Posted January 30, 2007 i posted some stereograms from sunday under the off-topic forum. some turned out pretty good. some were so-so. i' m learning. i had to adjust the size of the photos to 800 x 300. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ryan? Posted January 30, 2007 Report Share Posted January 30, 2007 Bobble,<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p> Most cameras slr light meters are often 1/3 to 1/2 top different. My film based camera is set at iso 80 even though there is iso 100 speed film loaded. <o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p> Solution: On a clear day between 10am and 2 pm aim you camera to the northern blue sky. The camera meter should give you a shutter speed of 1/the iso setting. For 200 iso film the shutter speed should read 1/200 at f16. 1/100 (or 1/125 depending on how fine of adjustments your camera has - either is fine) for iso 100 etc. If it does not, manually alter the cameras iso until the correct shutter speed is achieved. The f stop is always f16 for this test. Often referred to as the "sunny 16". Determine the iso for each camera- adjust the iso setting manually according to the test and your cameras should then give you the exact meter reading every time (assuming the field of view of each camera consists of equal parts snow/sky/carver).<o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p> Film speeds: Use as slow of a film as you possibly can. iso 200 is twice as fast as 100 - obviously. But this means that shooting at f16 your shutter speed goes from 1/125 to 1/250 when changing from 100 to 200 speed film. This increase in shutter speed is also achieved by moving from f/16 to f11. The resultant increase in shutter speed is the same. Going to f11 you loose a small amount of depth of field, going to iso 200 film you increase grain. Once you move to iso 400 film the trade off is too great in my opinion. Iso 400 film is miserable. Very grainy. Some people like this look, I don't. I shoot 2-300 rolls of film a year (wildlife-nature) 90% is iso 100 the other 10% is iso 50 for scenics. I've shot iso 400 for the northern lights on two occasions. My recommendation would be to use a film fast enough to get you 1/750 of a sec or better at f5.6. <o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p> Exposure: You camera will make snow grey every time. To make white snow you need to add from 1.5 to 2 stops of light. Meaning if point your camera at the snow and it says 1/500 at f8, you want to decrease the speed or decrease the f stop to allow more light into the camera. 1/500 at f5.0 would give you 1.3 stops more light (a stop is a doubling), making grey snow look white. Probably more than you wanted, but hope it helps. Ryan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kirtap Posted January 31, 2007 Report Share Posted January 31, 2007 Skuff~ I was at Hyland Monday night and stopped by the table to say hi. I saw Matt but he said you weren't coming that night. I got work off on Saturday morning so I think I might try to make it to your practice. Its from 9-11? And will it be SL or GS? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldkey Posted January 31, 2007 Report Share Posted January 31, 2007 USASA event at Wild Mountain. Last MN alpine event this year until nationals in Tahoe. Karl will be at Wild as will most of the G-Team that rides alpine. Sorry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobble Posted January 31, 2007 Author Report Share Posted January 31, 2007 Bobble,<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p> Most cameras slr light meters are often 1/3 to 1/2 top different. My film based camera is set at iso 80 even though there is iso 100 speed film loaded. <o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p> Solution: On a clear day between 10am and 2 pm aim you camera to the northern blue sky. The camera meter should give you a shutter speed of 1/the iso setting. For 200 iso film the shutter speed should read 1/200 at f16. 1/100 (or 1/125 depending on how fine of adjustments your camera has - either is fine) for iso 100 etc. If it does not, manually alter the cameras iso until the correct shutter speed is achieved. The f stop is always f16 for this test. Often referred to as the "sunny 16". Determine the iso for each camera- adjust the iso setting manually according to the test and your cameras should then give you the exact meter reading every time (assuming the field of view of each camera consists of equal parts snow/sky/carver).<o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p> Film speeds: Use as slow of a film as you possibly can. iso 200 is twice as fast as 100 - obviously. But this means that shooting at f16 your shutter speed goes from 1/125 to 1/250 when changing from 100 to 200 speed film. This increase in shutter speed is also achieved by moving from f/16 to f11. The resultant increase in shutter speed is the same. Going to f11 you loose a small amount of depth of field, going to iso 200 film you increase grain. Once you move to iso 400 film the trade off is too great in my opinion. Iso 400 film is miserable. Very grainy. Some people like this look, I don't. I shoot 2-300 rolls of film a year (wildlife-nature) 90% is iso 100 the other 10% is iso 50 for scenics. I've shot iso 400 for the northern lights on two occasions. My recommendation would be to use a film fast enough to get you 1/750 of a sec or better at f5.6. <o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p> Exposure: You camera will make snow grey every time. To make white snow you need to add from 1.5 to 2 stops of light. Meaning if point your camera at the snow and it says 1/500 at f8, you want to decrease the speed or decrease the f stop to allow more light into the camera. 1/500 at f5.0 would give you 1.3 stops more light (a stop is a doubling), making grey snow look white. Probably more than you wanted, but hope it helps. Ryan thanks for the advice, ryan. i was talking to a coworker yesterday and he also recommneded going to iso 100. i will definitely try that sunny 16 test. i'm still trying to understand the light meters. my coworker said to just trust camera, ignore the other and set them up the same. he said instead of f22 to go to f13 or f11 and adjust shutter speed accordingly. even though there's greater depth of field the f22 creates sort of a soft focus effect. when you adjust your cameras using that sunny 16 test, is that the same as "pushing"? wouldn't i need to tell the photolab that the film roll is pushed? or does it even matter if i'm shooting in manual mode? i'm not sure what looks better, gray snow vs white snow. i suppose gray snow has more detail. next time i'm at spirit i'll bring the rig. video camera too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobD Posted January 31, 2007 Report Share Posted January 31, 2007 Bob Pushing a film while developing allows for underexposure of the film. You end up with very grainy images. The exposure meter on your camera bases it's measurements on the assumption that what it is looking at is 17% grey. That is an average of greyness of everything. When the meter sees snow, it again assumes the snow is 17% grey and under exposes by up to 2 stops. Ideally you would base you exposure by pointing the camera at a 17% grey card. There may well be small variations in the meters and shutter speeds of both cameras. Only close examination of the negatives would reveal this (the prints would not). If you are using color print film, you have a lot of latitude, but always aire on the side of over exposure (with negs). This gives more detail in the shadows. BobD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scuff Posted January 31, 2007 Report Share Posted January 31, 2007 I was at Hyland Monday night and stopped by the table to say hi. Pat: I've been keeping an eye out for you all season. Bummer we keep missing! I rode 5 days last week and my knees just needed a break. Will be out both tonight (Wed) and tomorrow getting everyone ready for the race this Sat up at Wild. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kirtap Posted January 31, 2007 Report Share Posted January 31, 2007 Yeah, with work and school and everything this year, I haven’t been able to make it out as much as I would have liked to. I'm sure I will see you or some other carvers out some time. I met a few kids this year, first year on alpine for both of them. One was a young boy with a green Burton I think, and the other was a young girl that had a matching jacket and snow pants, purple with flowers I think... The girl said you picked out her boots... Good luck to everyone on Saturday. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
powell1.8 Posted February 1, 2007 Report Share Posted February 1, 2007 Sounds like my photo instructor in high school, and college for that matter, didn't really know what they were talking about when it came to film speed. It figures. I never trusted that guy anyway. He was always ripping on snowboarding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ryan? Posted February 1, 2007 Report Share Posted February 1, 2007 Bobble,<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p> As mentioned previously calibration of your light meter may be academic. If you are shooting print film, disregard the differences. Print film results in a negative. The negative may be slightly too bright or dark depending on your error or the cameras meter being "off". The negative is then projected on photographic paper and the paper is exposed to achieve what the photo machine thinks is the correct exposure. The film also has the ability to see a wider range of brightness levels - latitude. Slide film when processed is simply the film that was in your camera mounted in a plastic or cardboard frame. If you make an exposure mistake there is no second step to correct it.<o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p> If you are shooting slide film, changing the iso manually to get a correct sunny 16 exposure requires no other intervention. It’s like entering $.25 correction into you check register to balance you account. It’s actually more convenient to take the camera and have the meter recalibrated, but I consistently shoot 100 speed film so I just leave the camera set at iso 80. The other thing to remember is that there is not correct exposure. Some people intentionally over or under exposure their film to achieve a certain look. Consistency is the key. If you get dark photos all the time and don't like them, then calibrating your cameras meter gives you a known staring point from which to get the correct exposure.<o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p> Cold cold cold in <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" /><st1:City w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Duluth</st1:place></st1:City> -6 for a high on Fri.<o:p></o:p> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobble Posted February 2, 2007 Author Report Share Posted February 2, 2007 hard to believe its february already. went out around 10:30am. frickin' cold (about 5 F) but the snow was great. i over heard the fine hottie in the ticket office say they might turn off the torch light tonite -- too many people are canceling due to the cold weather. there might've been maybe 20-30 people total at buck. i was wearing a balaclava for my face. it was really windy at the top. i frequently had to cover my nose else it would get numb. saw someone skiing with no face protection whatsoever. idiot. again, the snow was great. i stayed until my toes got cold, about 1.5 hours. hallowed are the ori! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobD Posted February 3, 2007 Report Share Posted February 3, 2007 If this morning was anything to go by, we should have the place to our selves Sunday morning. BobD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. T Posted February 3, 2007 Report Share Posted February 3, 2007 You are brave indeed! How long did you last? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trent Posted February 3, 2007 Report Share Posted February 3, 2007 i always look forward to the extreme cold. it keeps the crowds down, plus most of the "beer league" skiers are afraid of it too. always good times carving in january! wasn't able to get out today, but hope to tomorrow. but since we're hosting a commercial bowl party, i may have to stay local to get home and get ready. -trent Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.