Advice on Graduation Ceremony Shooting

[imaginary_number]

sorry to trouble u again... how to reduce the power...
know nothing of this flash.... :embrass:

I've mentioned it earlier actually, just press "SEL". You'll see the exposure compensation icon, then the press "+" or "-" for increasing or decreasing.

 

[imaginary_number]

ok.... noted... :embrass:
really short of $$$ nvm, once improve skilll then more confident to purchase better lense next time. :thumbsup:

Don't worry about the lens too much. If you're just printing 4R, it's not that big an issue. Just bump up the sharpness when post-processing the shots. And, as far as possible, use ISO400 and below since you might want to perform a fair amount of sharpening on your pics.

 

[lion]

Don't worry about the lens too much. If you're just printing 4R, it's not that big an issue. Just bump up the sharpness when post-processing the shots. And, as far as possible, use ISO400 and below since you might want to perform a fair amount of sharpening on your pics.

thank you.

will try to use low ISO and flash.. wish me good luck for getting good photo! :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

 

[Snowcrash]

thank you.

will try to use low ISO and flash.. wish me good luck for getting good photo! :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

shoot more, show less

 

[imaginary_number]

thank you.

will try to use low ISO and flash.. wish me good luck for getting good photo! :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

You're welcome. ISO400 will be good for the usual indoor situation.

Oh ya, good luck!

 

[dundee]

Don't worry about the lens too much. If you're just printing 4R, it's not that big an issue. Just bump up the sharpness when post-processing the shots. And, as far as possible, use ISO400 and below since you might want to perform a fair amount of sharpening on your pics.

Sorry, but i have to disagree. :nono: Shooting with a f 5.6 zoom is NOT fun, in a normal "indoor" lighting, with such a lens, what kind of flexibility will you have? The lens is more important than the camera itself. A "L" prime on a cheap 300v (film) body will yield better results than a 28-200 on a 1Ds. LOL

eg: iso 400, f5.6, 1/60-125
What will happen in such a shot? In a normal school hall, you will end up having to use that flash on 1/2-full power and will end up with a dark/black background. not good. Also, the resoluton in lion's setup is limited by the lens, not the camera. The kit shot wide open does not resolve well at all.

try this, iso 800-1600, f5.6-8 1/60-125, bounced flash
-use neatimage/noiseninja to clean up the noise
-do NOT under-expose, push pic to right of histogram, but dont clip. Push pic back to center in PS. (easier said than done, but try.) ;p

this will handle the noise problem and will yield best results, assuming you cant stretch to get a better lens. on the 17-40, you can stick to f4. :bsmilie:

 

[dundee]

http://www.photo.net/equipment/canon/efs18-55/shootout

 

[mpenza]

try this, iso 800-1600, f5.6-8 1/60-125, bounced flash
-use neatimage/noiseninja to clean up the noise
-do NOT under-expose, push pic to right of histogram, but dont clip. Push pic back to center in PS. (easier said than done, but try.) ;p

this will handle the noise problem and will yield best results, assuming you cant stretch to get a better lens. on the 17-40, you can stick to f4. :bsmilie:

you'll probably (severely) underexpose when you bounce since the ceiling is probably quite high.

in the graduation ceremony I attended, the background (inside the hall) is dark, so it doesn't matter much.

but best to do is to meter at the place. awkardly placed spotlights might require adjustments to the shutter speed to prevent clipping/overexposure of parts of the pic.

 

[imaginary_number]

Sorry, but i have to disagree. :nono: Shooting with a f 5.6 zoom is NOT fun, in a normal "indoor" lighting, with such a lens, what kind of flexibility will you have? The lens is more important than the camera itself. A "L" prime on a cheap 300v (film) body will yield better results than a 28-200 on a 1Ds. LOL

Read what I said, I mentioned for prints up to 4R. You need to be a lot more discerning when taking in opinions. I'm not advocating that a non-L will outresolve an L. Remember that ultimately, the most important thing is the final output - and in this case, if the prints are only up to 4R, it's acceptable with a fair amount of sharpening in Photoshop.

eg: iso 400, f5.6, 1/60-125
What will happen in such a shot? In a normal school hall, you will end up having to use that flash on 1/2-full power and will end up with a dark/black background. not good. Also, the resoluton in lion's setup is limited by the lens, not the camera. The kit shot wide open does not resolve well at all.

It is unwise to make such a speculation with unknown variables. Btw, I didn't suggest using f5.6. A appropriate setting (with his equipment) for such a situation is 1/60, f4, iso400. If the celing is low enough, bounce, otherwise fire direct. You're right in saying that the resolution in lion's setup is limited by the lens, but that only matters as much as the final print size - in the case of 4R, it's not an issue.

try this, iso 800-1600, f5.6-8 1/60-125, bounced flash
-use neatimage/noiseninja to clean up the noise
-do NOT under-expose, push pic to right of histogram, but dont clip. Push pic back to center in PS. (easier said than done, but try.) ;p

I wouldn't advise using bounced flash without knowing the actual situation, it'll depend on the height of the ceiling. More often, for most of the ceremonies that I cover, the ceiling is too high for a bounced flash to be effective, this would be even more unadvisable at apertures smaller than f4.

One more thing, on a lens that you know to be soft, running a noise-reduction program will introduce more softness, no doubt reducing the noise, but also reducing the details at the same time.

Read my next post.

 

[imaginary_number]

http://www.photo.net/equipment/canon/efs18-55/shootout

Reading (and quoting) reviews is a good thing, but ultimately, you need to be aware that it's the application that matters.

Size reduced and sharpened:

Thus, that's why I mentioned that printing in 4R is not really an issue with a fair amount of sharpening.

P.S. : this is only edge performance, center crops will yield better results.

 

[imaginary_number]

Sorry, but i have to disagree. :nono: Shooting with a f 5.6 zoom is NOT fun, in a normal "indoor" lighting, with such a lens, what kind of flexibility will you have? The lens is more important than the camera itself.

Btw, the person using the camera is more important than both the lens and the camera - god knows how many times this has been mentioned in clubsnap...

 

[dundee]

Read what I said, I mentioned for prints up to 4R. You need to be a lot more discerning when taking in opinions. I'm not advocating that a non-L will outresolve an L. Remember that ultimately, the most important thing is the final output - and in this case, if the prints are only up to 4R, it's acceptable with a fair amount of sharpening in Photoshop.



It is unwise to make such a speculation with unknown variables. Btw, I didn't suggest using f5.6. A appropriate setting (with his equipment) for such a situation is 1/60, f4, iso400. If the celing is low enough, bounce, otherwise fire direct. You're right in saying that the resolution in lion's setup is limited by the lens, but that only matters as much as the final print size - in the case of 4R, it's not an issue.


One more thing, on a lens that you know to be soft, running a noise-reduction program will introduce more softness, no doubt reducing the noise, but also reducing the details at the same time.

Read my next post.

1) 4R prints? if i wanted a 4R print, i will use a p&s. No need to trouble my friend to come and shoot for me. (my assumption)

2) 1/60s !? Unless u have a very still subject....use 1/125 or higher if possible. (That said i use f1.4-f2 very extensively to get these shutter speeds.)

3) i mentioned f5.6 cos the kit lens gets there reali fast.... doh ever used it? or even auditioned a 300D extensively for that matter? :dunno: :think:

4) as for the noise-reduction, perhaps i shd have made it more clear. U run neat-image, then apply USM then run neatimage again. i did A3 prints after processing it this way.

 

[imaginary_number]

1) 4R prints? if i wanted a 4R print, i will use a p&s. No need to trouble my friend to come and shoot for me. (my assumption)

The advice dished out here is in the context of the thread starter's situation, not yours. I shan't bother to list out the differences between using a P&S and DSLR since it's rather obvious.

2) 1/60s !? Unless u have a very still subject....use 1/125 or higher if possible. (That said i use f1.4-f2 very extensively to get these shutter speeds.)

This is a graduation ceremony, not a dance performance - 1/60 is usable when taken at wide angle. In addition, when the ambient lighting is dark, the effective shutter speed will be that of the flash's duration - in such a case, the shutter speed used has no bearing (at all) on the exposure of the flash-illuminated subject. Bear in mind that the settings aren't fixed, which is why, if you'd read carefully, I mentioned an appropriate setting. Actual settings depend on the situation itself. Btw, please note that plainly dishing out advice without consideration of the context is meaningless at best.

3) i mentioned f5.6 cos the kit lens gets there reali fast.... doh ever used it? or even auditioned a 300D extensively for that matter? :dunno: :think:

FYI, yes.

4) as for the noise-reduction, perhaps i shd have made it more clear. U run neat-image, then apply USM then run neatimage again. i did A3 prints after processing it this way.

Doing A3 prints doesn't say anything much - I've made A0 prints for clients using my previous D60 - and that doesn't say much either.

The point is, noise-reduction algorithms, as a matter of fact, reduce details as well. Consider noise which occurs at say in the range of n to 2n Hz - when you use a user friendly software like neatimage, it assesses the noise profile and reduces/eliminates those details at frequencies whereby it deems to be noise. Most, if not, all of the times, actual details are filtered off (or attenuated) along with the noise. In truth, actual details are lost at those frequencies - and no amount of USM will retrieve details that are lost. USM doesn't create details, it merely makes an image perceivably sharper. Whether the final output is acceptable, ultimately, depends on you or your client's threshold (or the lack of).

 

[dundee]

Reading (and quoting) reviews is a good thing, but ultimately, you need to be aware that it's the application that matters.

Size reduced and sharpened:

Thus, that's why I mentioned that printing in 4R is not really an issue with a fair amount of sharpening.

P.S. : this is only edge performance, center crops will yield better results.

I dont think he will want to sharpen *this much* when shooting indoors wont it kill the pic?

 

[nickmak]

Wah... I think we OT so much and not giving much help...

Let me try:

I think use the equipment you have first... Bump the ISO high enough to get a reasonably sharp picture at the widest aperture you can get with the lenses you have. The noise is not that bad on the 300D, I personally own one so trust me on this...

I usually shoot with EV -1 and if flash power can be changed, I have it at -1-2/3 power. Should be able to give you a well exposed shot... Play around indoors and see what works for you. My B&W shots here: http://www.forum.clubsnap.org/showthread.php?t=103971 were all taken using the setting above...

Hope this helps, perhaps others might be able to help you, instead of OTing... :bsmilie:

Cheers,
Nick

 

[dundee]

The advice dished out here is in the context of the thread starter's situation, not yours. I shan't bother to list out the differences between using a P&S and DSLR since it's rather obvious.

I agree. Misunderstanding on my part.

This is a graduation ceremony, not a dance performance - 1/60 is usable when taken at wide angle. In addition, when the ambient lighting is dark, the effective shutter speed will be that of the flash's duration - in such a case, the shutter speed used has no bearing (at all) on the exposure of the flash-illuminated subject. Bear in mind that the settings aren't fixed, which is why, if you'd read carefully, I mentioned an appropriate setting. Actual settings depend on the situation itself. Btw, please note that plainly dishing out advice without consideration of the context is meaningless at best.

i think this is a misunderstanding on your part.... this is true if the flash is used as the main light source. If you want to use ambient light, this is no longer the case. (hey i would want to see the stage/backgroung plainly without lots of ugly shadows. Wont you? :sweat: )

Doing A3 prints doesn't say anything much - I've made A0 prints for clients using my previous D60 - and that doesn't say much either.

The point is, noise-reduction algorithms, as a matter of fact, reduce details as well. Consider noise which occurs at say in the range of n to 2n Hz - when you use a user friendly software like neatimage, it assesses the noise profile and reduces/eliminates those details at frequencies whereby it deems to be noise. Most, if not, all of the times, actual details are filtered off (or attenuated) along with the noise. In truth, actual details are lost at those frequencies - and no amount of USM will retrieve details that are lost. USM doesn't create details, it merely makes an image perceivably sharper. Whether the final output is acceptable, ultimately, depends on you or your client's threshold (or the lack of).

Agree with you totally. However you forgot to mention the other side of the coin.

It is a known fact that digital sensors can only "respond" to a certain range of light frequencies. (this differs slightly from sensor to sensor) Hence we have these nifty filters in front of the sensor to cut out these frequencies which would otherwise exhibit themselves as moire/artifacts.

Using the software to cut out only these frequencies can actually improve your image, getting rid of the artifacts/noise without losing significant details. Expecially if you use the filter in moderation. Thus it is possible to remove the noise, without losing significant detail.

Oh yeah about the USM, we all probably know that already. Was trying to show the OP how to get better images out of a probably soft and noisy pic. More edge contrast DOES help in the print you know


Hmm this is starting to look like another flame war. Imaginary_Number, if you find any of my statements offensive, I'll retract it immediately. I do not wish to offend/hurt the feelings of anybody :embrass:

 

[imaginary_number]

I dont think he will want to sharpen *this much* when shooting indoors wont it kill the pic?

Well, it was a rough example used to illustrate a point.

 

[imaginary_number]

i think this is a misunderstanding on your part.... this is true if the flash is used as the main light source. If you want to use ambient light, this is no longer the case. (hey i would want to see the stage/backgroung plainly without lots of ugly shadows. Wont you? :sweat: )

Nope, I didn't misunderstand, but perhaps you read too quickly. I mentioned "In addition, when the ambient lighting is dark". It wasn't a generalization, but an additional point that I decided to bring up.

Agree with you totally. However you forgot to mention the other side of the coin.

It is a known fact that digital sensors can only "respond" to a certain range of light frequencies. (this differs slightly from sensor to sensor) Hence we have these nifty filters in front of the sensor to cut out these frequencies which would otherwise exhibit themselves as moire/artifacts.

Yes, it's called an anti-aliasing filter. And whether a sensor can "respond" to it depends primarily on the sampling frequency in the data acquistion system. Most people who have studied digital communications and instrumentation would understand the inner workings of it well enough.

Using the software to cut out only these frequencies can actually improve your image, getting rid of the artifacts/noise without losing significant details. Expecially if you use the filter in moderation. Thus it is possible to remove the noise, without losing significant detail.

Yes, but the point is details, together with noise, does get filtered off as well. Whether it's possible to remove noise without losing significant detail depends on the image - and both you and I aren't able to make a conclusive statement without seeing the actual image. Hence, it might be possible to remove noise w/o losing significant detail, yet at the same time, it might also not be possible to remove significant noise without losing significant details in certain areas of an image. That's why, ultimately, whether an image is acceptable or not depends on the person evaluating it. What is acceptable to me might not be so by your standards and vice versa.

Oh yeah about the USM, we all probably know that already. Was trying to show the OP how to get better images out of a probably soft and noisy pic. More edge contrast DOES help in the print you know

Yes, I agree it does too - if the edge still exists after filtering, that is.

Hmm this is starting to look like another flame war. Imaginary_Number, if you find any of my statements offensive, I'll retract it immediately. I do not wish to offend/hurt the feelings of anybody :embrass:

We're getting a little OT indeed.

Just to clarify, my intention was to make lion feel comfortable with his equipment and not be overly concerned about using a kit lens vs an L (see post #22). Having said that, I guess continuing this discussion is rather pointless since at the end of the day, we're both right - everything is context-dependent.