HOME | DD

bast-86 In reply to Tensense [2009-05-27 10:01:34 +0000 UTC]

and your flame isn't fixed because the focus is on the main character and not on the fire, the depth of field is too short with your teleobj to have both sharp.

but yes your picture is pretty emotive.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Tensense In reply to bast-86 [2009-05-27 17:44:53 +0000 UTC]

Thank you! I like to very much myself. There were several boys in front of the fire. I was standing rather far away so I had to move all the time in order to get them 'into the fire'! =]

Absolutely true, here you can view an image where the focus missed if you want to compare.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Thoum In reply to Tensense [2009-05-27 00:14:05 +0000 UTC]

It's difficult to see if yours is more or less fix...
And it also depends on the type of flame you shoot.
I used 1/500 (see the exifs below the image), a critical speed in firebreathing, because you can have a part of the flame that move too fast to be realy neat. On this shot I was lucky to shoot this precise moment, when the beginning of the flame is still moving, and the end developped, so slowing down.

It's a nice picture you have here, nice symetry !

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Tensense In reply to Thoum [2009-05-27 17:42:09 +0000 UTC]

Oh -- I guess I was too struck by your incredibly powerful image to see that EXIF data... hah.

Are you saying that there is a component in the explosion that becomes blurry even at 1/500 (seen from the torch and upwards, slightly yellowish)? It seems so. Can that part not be rendered nicely even at, say 1/2000?

A big difference between your image and mine is that yours represent an explosion (which makes it such a cool image), or at least something close to that, whereas mine is an continously, although rather big, burning fire. I've uploaded a new picture where the focus missed so it's easier to see the flames: here

Again, your imageS are truly magificent. I wish to

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Thoum In reply to Tensense [2009-05-27 19:15:21 +0000 UTC]

I never shot at a speed as fast as 1/2000, because you can't have the right amount of light whithout a strong iso and aperture, that means a bad neatness and a lot of parasites.
1/500 is a good speed because you can have the chance to have a nice motion blur in a part of your photo and a really neat part of the flame too.

The fire on your shot is really neat, but your high iso speed (1600) maked a lot of grain. With a widest aperture and a little bit slower shutter speed, you could obtain a cleaner image.

again, your idea to outline your model with fire is really great, but your shots would be better with a lower iso, on the 400d (that I use too), the grain is really awfull.


Sorry for my bad english, I hope you'll understand this message

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Thoum In reply to Feiti [2009-05-23 13:03:32 +0000 UTC]

Les petits points blancs sont tout simplement des lampadaires dans l'arrière plan
Le cadrage est pas tout à fait parfait non plus (même si j'en suis très content), j'aurais bien aimé avoir le personnage plus bord cadre à gauche histoire de ne pas couper la flamme à droite mais seulement en haut.

Pour la gestion de la lumière, le réglage est celui de la fin de soirée, c'est à dire que tu as déja pris pas mal de photos et que tu as bien affiné ce que tu veux en regardant les photos précédentes.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Feiti In reply to Thoum [2009-05-23 13:10:59 +0000 UTC]

à quelques millimètres près ya quand meme une belle diagonale.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Thoum In reply to rockchili [2009-04-08 11:30:12 +0000 UTC]

My camera is a very ordinary 400d.
Bracketing means that there is several pictures taken of this scene, but a flame like that is really fast and it's totaly impossible with my camera to have different expositions of exactly the same moment.
This is not HDR, HDR works only with still objects.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0