Eclipse - My fav shot

After a bit of playing about and cropping of shots from the eclipse, I have decided that this is my favourite:

Lunar Eclipse

On Friday and Saturday night, Simone and I went to a place on the NSW coast called Mollymook and stayed in a great apartment right on the beach. On Saturday morning, whilst watching the news I found out that there was going to be a lunar eclipse that night (Saturday 10/12/11) from between 12ish and 3ish in the morning.

I had never seen an eclipse before, and luckily I had my SLR with me on the trip, along with my standard zoom lens. Unfortunately I didn't have a tripod with me, so at midnight I found myself lying on the cold ground of our apartment balcony, with my camera sitting against an empty cake box that I molded to have my lens pointing in just the right direction.

It took quite a bit of trial and error to get the settings right, but I settled (with a few minor variants) on:

• Manual Mode
• ISO 100
• f 16
• 1/25  right up to 1 - 2 second exposure

As the moon got smaller, I had to increase the exposure time to compensate for the lack of light. I messed about with increasing my ISO but unfortunately jumped to the extremes (3400, 6400!) instead of playing around with more reasonable numbers (such as 200, 400, etc) - and the results were far too noisy. The higher ISO's did however show up the red glow far more effectively than the shots with the lower ISO's.

Overall, I am happy with how the shots turned out. I also messed about on the computer and merged a few into a single shot so that the transition is really noticeable. So here are the results: 

A few recent shots...

Well, I have been a bit quiet on here lately. In all honesty, it has been because I have been spending a lot of time on another project, being Droid App of the Day. Regardless, I've still being taking plenty of pics over the last few months, and even though I can't say I have tried anything too "new" or "adventurous" there are still a few shots that I am happy with! (click on the pics to make larger)

Taken at "Floriade" in Canberra

Taken at Cottosloe Beach in Perth

Taken in Auckland New Zealand

Taken in the ACT, Australia

Timelapse Photography - a spinning sky

Whilst catching up on my daily news yesterday, I stumbled across the following article on news.com.au:

Photographer Lincoln Harrison puts a new spin on shooting stars

For some reason is stood out at me because (a) someone taking some pretty decent time lapse photos of stars didn't feel worthy of being "national news*", but more so (b) it got me thinking why I hadn't tried to replicate such photos before myself.  

 

After a quick google about, one of the first links I stumbled upon was this explanation, on a blog called

Happy Snapper.

This explanation (the first option described in the above blog) will likely be the process I will follow, and seems to be broken into four simple steps:

1. Put camera on a tripod, into Manual, put it on a large aperture (f4) and put the shutter onto bulb (admittedly this is a couple of steps in one, but oh well);
2. Put the camera on a high ISO, 400 - 800. I'll probably try 400 to start with;
3. Put on Manual Focus, and set it to infinity (8) -  (double check though that any items in the foreground are also in focus before starting); and finally
4. Using a remote shutter cable, take a photo from anywhere between 5 and 30 mins (allegedly 30 mins gives quite a "crowd pleasing" result. 

It seems to be a relatively straight forward process, which I will be sure to try next time I am camping or in a quiet place away from light "pollution". 

 

So, has anyone else given this a try? Any tips?

 

On a somewhat related topic, I also stumbled across a Norwegian photographer called Terje Sorgjerd who is also in the business of taking amazing shots of quite different forms of light (stars, lightning from volcano's, the northern lights, etc)

 

If you have 5 minutes, I strongly suggest you watch the following videos he has created using a time lapse capture method. Amazing stuff:

*by national news, I mean "international news"... this exact story seems to have been repeated in every second online news site across Australia and the UK. If anything, it really shows we need a few more news corporations, who employ a few more real journalists! See below links for a small example!

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/more-news/a-new-spin-on-shooting-stars/story-fn7x8me2-1226126751556

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/travel/australia/a-new-spin-on-shooting-stars/story-fn3025r5-1226126850441

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/travel/australia/gallery-e6frezii-1226126854734?page=1

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2031704/Australian-photographer-Lincoln-Harrison-endures-15-hour-photo-shoots-capture-stunning-night-images-star-trails.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/picturegalleries/picturesoftheday/8730716/Pictures-of-the-day-30-August-2011.html?image=14

Under-exposed Long Exposures at the Beach

This weekend, Simone and I headed away for a weekend on the South Coast at a little place called Potato Point. It ended up being a great opportunity to try out a few new things on my camera. In particualar, I was interested in trying to capture waves crashing over rocks using a long exposure. For some reason, I always appreciate these types of shots when I see other people create them, so I thought I would try for myself (see here for an example of what I was aiming for:  http://news.deviantart.com/article/121175/)

It was an overcast afternoon, which gave me a chance to snap a few shots a bit earlier than would have been possible had the sun been shining brightly. Despite this, I still underexposed my first couple of shots to make up for the fact that there was still a bit of sun about. The greyness of the afternoon didn't however create the most exciting or contrasting backgrounds.

Anyway, using my tripod, precariously perched on jagged rocks, I tried about 4 or 5 different locations over the course of an hour, and managed to come away with a few shots that I was happy with.

 

 f22, 4 secs, ISO100, -4 exp, B&W post processing

 

 f20, 3.2secs, ISO100

 f8, 1sec, ISO100

Check out my flickr Stream  for some other shots of the trip, was really happy with what I came away with.

On a side note, I have started playing about with adding borders to some of my pictures. For certain shots I feel it adds to the impact. I use a free program called "Frame Fun" (available here: http://framefun.en.softonic.com/) which is quite easy to use and can batch process large groups of pics. The borders are a bit of an overkill for the small shots on here (as Blogger automatically adds a plain white background), but they  seem to look good if you enlarge individual images.

Tilt Shift Photography - Miniaturising Life

For something a bit different...

Simone came home the other day after going to a euro vision "party" and told me that they used some cool effects for the intro's and outro's of the show. Curiosity got the better of me so after a bit of googling I found out they were displaying video that used an effect known as "tilt shift". So what is "tilt shift"?

Essentially, it is a form of photography (or video as it turns out) in which the focus has been altered (usually digitally) to give a perception of the scene being miniaturised. In effect, it makes ordinary cityscapes look like photos taken of Cockington Green.

A good example (of the video format of this effect) is the following clip I found of the Coachella Music Festival in the United States:

In terms of photography, a simple Google image search will reveal endless examples, but I was keen to give it a try myself. Unfortunately, I had not taken any pictures for this particular purpose, so I feel my shots are a bit too far "back" from the action to be as impressive as they could. Generally, I think this effect would work best if there can be people or vehicles in the scene to add a greater sense of perspective.

In order to make the pics, I followed this guide: http://www.tiltshiftphotography.net/photoshop-tutorial.php

It was quite easy and worked perfectly - my first time ever playing with Photoshop as well, and it has got me interested in playing around more with post-processing. I have came to realise though, that because I am colour blind, I really do have to take a stab in the dark as to whether the changes I have made are any good (colour wise)!

Anyway, here are the results, both are pics I dug up from our trips to New Zealand in the beginning of the year:

Camping - Gordon Country and Namadgi

Over the Easter break I flew up to Brissi and went camping with my brother and a few mates. The place we went to is known as Gordon Country, and is traditional bush camping next to a creek. Then, a couple of weeks later my brother and a few friends went camping in Namadgi National Park in the ACT. Again, this was typical bush camping.


Both trips gave me a good chance to take a few pics, and to get out the tripod or High ISOs for some low light shots around the campfire.

 

f5.6, 1/100, ISO640 

(As the sun was going down over the river, I thought I should at least try to catch a good shot. I think I may have been a little too early, as I couldn't quite seem to get the pic I wanted. I did a bit of playing around with the contrast and colours on this one on the PC, and got this to a point where it is OK)

 f4.5, 30 sec, ISO100

(I quite like this one, a long 30 second exposure at a low ISO with a tripod. The big log moved a bit because the boys on the other side were kicking the fire to throw up the sparks. Still, I think even with the "not completely in focus" log, it's a good effect)

 F6.3, 1/250, ISO100

(I think these prickly bushes look pretty cool, so tried to get a focused shot of one with the kangaroos in the background. It worked, but the shot was taken at pretty much the worst time of the day (midday))

 

 f3.5, 1/30, ISO2500

(This is was one of the first time's I had taken my camera up to some of the higher ISO settings. I didn't have the tripod with me at this stage, so had to rely on hand-held, but i think the lighting and the great big fire came out really well)

 f4.5, 1/60, ISO 400

(After putting a log on the fire, we looked at one end and noticed a swarm of ants pouring out! This is a bit of a basic "snap")

 f5, 1/60, ISO400

(just a possum)

Fireworks - Skyfire 2011

Last weekend was Skyfire - a firework show which is held over Lake Burley Griffin in Canberra on a yearly basis. I originally wasn't planning on going along, and the on/off again rain of the night didn't do much to help.  I did however, receive a tripod for my Birthday recently, so at the last minute I decided it would be a perfect opportunity to test out taking some photos of fireworks.

I did my research beforehand...

http://www.photojournalist-tgh.tv/photojournalism/fireworks-photography-tips

http://www.digital-photography-school.com/how-to-photograph-fireworks

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/digitalcameras/tips-for-photographing-fireworks/974

 
... and determined the general consensus on taking good firework pictures seemed to be low ISO, long exposure, manual focus and a mid range aperture.

As I do not have a shutter release cable, I had to set the self timer to 2 seconds, then press the button before I expected the fireworks to be visible. As a result, using shorter exposures (such as 1 second) didn't seem to capture the moment as I intended as the timing was too difficult. For a solution, I opted for longer exposures (ranging from 4  - 30 seconds) making it impossible to miss the action.

On  side note, after coming home I decided (a) I did want a remote shutter release, but (b) I wanted one cheaply, so I jumped on eBay and have ordered myself the following Infared Remote Shutter Release. For $5.49 it will be interesting to see how it goes!

Some of the results...

f/11, 3.2s, ISO 100

f/11, 13s, ISO 320

f/11, 5s, ISO 125

Landscapes

Over the last couple of weeks I've decided I like landscape pics - both looking and taking. I think it is because I enjoy doing almost anything outdoors - and taking landscapes involves getting out and about - a perfect combination of my interests!

Considering this, I've taken my camera with me a couple of mornings on my ride to work. Once winter kicks in with a bit more force the lake will have a low fog and the sun will be rising far later so I think there should be a few chances to get a good shot or two.

For the time being however, this is a sample of what I've managed.

 

f11, 1/125s, ISO 100

f7.1, 1/50s, ISO 100

Shutter Speed - New Zealand and Fiji

It's been a while since my last post - I've been busy getting married, going on a honeymoon, attending another wedding, starting a new years of work and now moving house - but anyway...

I decided to write this post on shutter speed because it is something which I have been particularly enjoying playing with on my camera over the previous weeks. Essentially, the shutter speed is controlling the amount of light which enters the camera, but particularly, for what period of time light is allowed to enter the lens and "hit the film" (or the digital sensor). I found this to be a good summary with some good pics: http://mansurovs.com/what-is-shutter-speed-in-photography

At the moment I have only played around with slow shutter speeds, or long exposures.

One of the essential things I've realised I need (but don't have) is a tripod. This ensures that you capture the movement of things that are moving, but do not "shake" the things that are not moving. I don't have a tripod, so have had to rely on rocks and chairs and garbage bins, however a tripod really would have made getting good compositions easier as you are not restricted to relying on where local councils have places benches!

So, a few tips that I've picked up:

• If possible, keep the ISO as low as possible to reduce noise. This might not be possible in low light conditions though.
• Use the 2 second timer (or a remote) to take the pics so that you do not shake the lens as you press the button down.
• Allegedly turning the image stabilizer off assists in reducing image blur (a paradox I know, but it's recommended none the less by many people)
• Try lots of different exposure times / ISO combinations to find the perfect mix. 

Here, a tripod would have been nice as the lights in the background would not have been blurred. Instead, this was handheld, however with quite a short exposure time.

This was taken sitting my camera precariously on a rock over looking the pond. As it was during the day I used a low ISO (200 if I remember) but only exposed for 3 seconds.

The above picture was taken when it was quite dark, probably about 9.30 at night. I had to use a high ISO and a long exposure time of 30 seconds, hence the noise - It did however help some of the stars make an appearance in the background. 

Again, water always seems to look good on long exposures. This was a low ISO (I think 100) but a long exposure (about 30 secs).

This picture was taken far earlier than the same little "hut" above, hence the reduced noise (I managed to use ISO 100) and a slightly shorter exposure time (about 10 secs).  Unfortunately the tide was not as far in.

Aperture - At home, in the park, in the mountains

I think one of the most common, effective and essential techniques I've wanted to know how to do in taking photos is the "blurry" background effect, which I feel adds a sense of depth and drama to even the most "undramatic" subject.

I have found there a combination of ways to achieve this effect. The simplest on my Canon 550D is to simply go into creative mode and slide the "background blurry or sharp" dial down to blurry. This however is cheating, so I wanted to learn what was happening behind the cloak of creative mode.

Enter the world of "Aperture". So what is Aperture? http://www.photoxels.com/tutorial_aperture.html

In a nutshell, Aperture is how wide the lens of the camera is open, and accordingly, how much light get in. Aperture is measured using a f number - which operates in the opposite manner than would be expected:

• SMALL aperture number = larger lens opening = Lots of light
• LARGE aperture number = smaller lens opening = Minimal light

So what does this have to do with blurring backgrounds? From what I've learnt it's all about Depth of Field: http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/depth-of-field.htm

As it turns out:

• A small aperture number = larger lens opening = lots of light = shallow depth of field = blurry background
• A larger aperture number = smaller lens opening = less light = larger depth of field = sharp background

The way I try to think of it is as if my eyes were the camera lens. This is helped particularly by the fact that I wear glasses (I am short sighted). The principles are probably completely incorrect and the parallels between my vision and a camera are probably wrong, but it makes it easy to remember!

• If I take off my glasses and look around things close to me are in focus but things in the background are fuzzy. This is like having a small aperture number, as my eyes are wide open and lots of light is getting in.
• If I see something in the distance and wish to make it clearer, I squint, reducing the amount of light getting in, increasing my aperture number, making the entire image sharper. 

Other than the aperture value, the focal length of the lens (and also the "close-ness" of the object to the camera) effects the Depth of Field but this is something I will worry about learning for another day! http://www.all-things-photography.com/depth-of-field.html

For the time being, I am happy putting my camera on the AV setting, setting the aperture as low as possible, bringing the subject of the photo close to the lens and snapping away. My playing thus far has made me want to get more lenses with lower aperture abilities, but for the time being I still have lots to learn! The results?