Hawaiian717 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 3092 posts, RR: 8 Posted (12 years 18 hours ago) and read 2047 times:
So far I've just been a print shooter. However, along with my last roll of Reala from B&H in New York, I also put in a roll of Kodachrome 64. I'm planning to try it out next weekend during a long layover in HNL (get a nice collection of HA DC-9s before they leave the fleet...).
Any tips on how to get the best results out of KR64, or anything I should do differently than when I'm shooting prints. My camera is a Canon EOS Rebel G, I normally shoot on "P" mode, using the autofocus.
Also, if the KR64 doesn't work out, I'm thinking of giving Provia 100F a try. Are there people out there that will take Provia slides (for collection basically), or if I go with Provia instead of KR will I basically be shooting for myself (which isn't necessarily bad, since that's what I do now with prints)? I've heard that most collectors only want KR; how true is this in reality?
Thomasphoto60 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 3723 posts, RR: 25 Reply 1, posted (12 years 17 hours ago) and read 1884 times:
Welcome to the wonderful world of slide shooting.
Warning, shooting slides in almost any 'programmed' mode is a recipie for disaster! While planes(or any subject) with netural tones will probably come out alright. With HA's overall white bodies however combined with the typical HNL sunshine ( I would assume that it will be Sunny!) could possibly lead to some underexposed shots depending upon the intensity and angle of the sun. Underexposed prints can be saved, slides cannot. Photoshop or similar programs will only have a limited success in saving said underexposed shots.
All slide films have a very narrow exposure latitude, meaning that over and underexposing a half stop or even more will yeild very noticeable results, some you may not like. Print films on the other hand have a considerbly wide esposure latitude. And since negative (print) films go through not only a processing stage but a printing stage, thus corrections can be made during the printing process. With prints you can over or underexpose to 2 stops and have a salvageable image.
Indeed KR is preferred by collectors. Kodachrome is a stunning film, sadly processing is often a long and tedious wait for your results to return, save fo those who live near Kodachrome processing centers like the one in New Jersey. I use both Provia and Velvia, these yeid fantastic results.
If you are not familiar with the manual operation of your camera, I suggest a quick course in basic metering.
Hawaiian717 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 3092 posts, RR: 8 Reply 2, posted (12 years 17 hours ago) and read 1863 times:
Hi Thomas, thanks for responding.
I was talking to Lufty in the chat room about it. At first he suggested I use Apeture Priority mode ("Av") set to 5.6. But then he found out that my lens is a Tokina 28-210mm f3.5-5.6 lens, at which point he said "P" should be fine because of the lens.
Any comments about this?
Also, once I was recommended a book called Photographing Airliners or something to that effect. I haven't gotten around to checking it out; anyone heard anything about it?
And regarding processing, I asked earlier about it in another thread. One person recommended a pro lab in La Jolla (San Diego), CA. I called them and they said they sent their KR work to Kodak in Whittier, CA. Any further suggestions on places in San Diego to get KR developed?
I suppose I should ask about where to get KR developed in HNL too, since I'll be there all summer...
Aircanon From Austria, joined Aug 2000, 238 posts, RR: 0 Reply 3, posted (12 years 16 hours ago) and read 1862 times:
Go ahead and try slides. There is nothing wrong about that decision. Although keep in mind that you will need a good slide scanner too.
I usually use print film and most of the photos turn out pretty good. Scanning prints with my Epson Prefection 1200U is also no problem. Now i bought the transperancy unit to that scanner. A pure waste of money. The slides when looking through the magnifyiing glass are all 100% ok. Perfect sharpness and everything else is perfect. But.... the scanning results with the transperancy unit was a big disappointment.
I´ll have to get myself a decent scanner like for example the Nikon LS-40 soon!
Blackened From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 4, posted (12 years 10 hours ago) and read 1838 times:
Slides are definitely a good decision. Provia 100F is the best slide film I've seen so far. Don't worry about exposure time and stuff too much. I've never had problems with over- or underexposure and I'm using either the AV setting or the full automatic mode and my EOS always does it fine. There's never a too bright shot and pictures might get too dark only when the light is very, very bad. And I'm shooting white fuselages in full sunlight very often. If I were you I wouldn't worry too much if there are good light conditions. Just go ahead.
Jderden777 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 1747 posts, RR: 33 Reply 5, posted (12 years 9 hours ago) and read 1838 times:
go ahead and try slides!!! they are wonderful...but i do still shoot print film (especially through tinted glass) but i love shooting slides! i can get them back pretty quick (3-4 days) and the colors and contrast are incredible with slides (i'm quite impressed with provia) but i have used kodak elite chrome or something like that but i wasn't that impressed. so depending on the situation and light, i will use either print or slide film and i always have both at my discretion..
here's my first slide shot on a.net...it was the kodak elite chrome slide film...
USAir_757 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 994 posts, RR: 9 Reply 6, posted (12 years 6 hours ago) and read 1834 times:
Warning, shooting slides in almost any 'programmed' mode is a recipie for disaster!
This is not really true. When I'm shooting a white plane, I just use the exposure compensation(and my camera steps in full stops - not 1/2's or 1/3's!). The only time I had a problem recently was when my batteries were low, as the camera underexposes every last shot.
Edwin, you don't have to spend the bulk to get a decent slide scanner. There are many used and decent scanners on ebay for cheap.
-Cullen Wassell @ MSL | Pentax *istDL, Sigma 28-80 AL DG Macro II, Sigma 70-300 DG Macro
Hawaiian717 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 3092 posts, RR: 8 Reply 7, posted (12 years 6 hours ago) and read 1830 times:
Regarding the scanner, that problem is being taken care of. My current scanner, a Microtek ScanMaker V310 flatbed, is incapable of doing a decent job even with prints. However, I managed to get a Minolta Dimage Scan Dual film scanner on eBay, and it's currently en-route. When I was shopping around, the other good auction site seemed to be uBid; Amazon, Yahoo, and MSN (also ZDNet, Dell, and a bunch of others all have the same listings as MSN) didn't have much but film scanners did occasionally come up there.
Thanks for everyone's suggestions, and if anyone has more, keep them coming! At the moment I guess I'll try a couple of different things. I'll probably use Program mode most of the time, but maybe get a couple on Aperture Priority mode to see if that makes a difference.
Blackened From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 8, posted (12 years 5 hours ago) and read 1826 times:
I don't know why but somehow I don't understand what you're talking about (disaster). I'd rather agree with USAir_757. I've never seen a really underexposed slide of a white aircraft body and I never use any exposure corrections. There are many pictures here that don't have this either and I'm sure the photographer didn't fix this digitally. Overexposing a half stop doesn't make the picture too bad but you can notice it easily cause the picture will be too bright. This is what I've experienced with Provia. You definitely don't need to over- or underexpose anything. The pictures turn out allright. I don't know what experiences you made - it's just so surprising to me.
Thomasphoto60 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 3723 posts, RR: 25 Reply 9, posted (12 years ago) and read 1819 times:
Wow, it seems that my advice have been given a big thumbs down!
I do acknowledge the fact that the meters built in today's cameras are more sophisicated than those of some 15-20 years ago when I first got started. And unlike a Canon F-1 or Nikon F3, with this generation of cameras and their 'matrix' meters, you can indeed shoot in tricky situations, i.e. a white bodied aircraft or a very dark bodied aircraft (USAirways ect..) and pull some useable images......but they are not fool proof!
It all comes down to the built in meters. You must remember while the meters are more sophiscated nowadays, they are still basically reflective meters that are calibrated to read 18% gray also known as 'average reflectance'. Meaning that they are designed to read the light being reflected off of you subject. An it is assumed by the meter that anything you point your camera at is 18% gray. Well in the real world of photography not is 18%. If your frame is filled with an overly light or dark subject that are beyond the camera's meter to read then it will assume that the subject is of average illumination ...18%. If you shoot what your meter says or worse yet your camera is in program mode and you have no control over the F stop, shutter, well then, chances are good that your excessively lit subject matter may be underexposed or an overexposed image will result from a very dark subject.
What many pros, myself included still do is carry a hand held incident meter. This meter unlike the one built into your camera reads light 'falling' onto your subject, thus giving you an accurate meter reading. Many magazinge shooters still use these meters because they are shooting chromes and do not completly trust the camera's meter. These are expensive devices costing $350.00 on up, but there are ways to get an accurate reading without having to purchase this type of device. One of the best was is to take a reading off of the palm of you hand or point you camera to something that is netural in tone, like grass, a medieum tone sign..well you get the point. One thing that one must remember though is to make certain that your subject is in the same quality of light from where you metered.
But I digress, if you are shooting an aircraft from a distace (as most of us do), then you guys are right, I would not worry too much, since you frame will possibly be filled other objects, i.e. tarmac, vehicles, grass, sky ect.. thus balancing out your subject to an avarage reading. But as I stated before, if your frame is almost completely composed of the white body of an HA DC-9, then I would be apprehensive about using a 'programmed' mode.
I know this is a little wordy, but I hope you understand what I am trying say.
Hawaiian717 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 3092 posts, RR: 8 Reply 10, posted (12 years ago) and read 1806 times:
I will likely be shooting mostly side profiles of the DC-9s while they are taxiing (or waiting for the tug to get removed, etc). In other words, on the ground near the terminal. I like to try and get the length of the airplane to fill the frame as much as possible, so for something like a relatively long DC-9-51, there will be a fair amount of sky above and tarmac below.
Rindt From Germany, joined May 2000, 930 posts, RR: 14 Reply 11, posted (11 years 12 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 1819 times:
With my Nikon F90x, I strictly shoot in Aperture Priority mode... at F8 or even F11. I rarely shoot any lower. This works for me because I have a fast-lense, but when you have F3.5-5.6 (where you lose a stop or so) might be a little tricky. I also have my F90x on -.3, so I don't over expose my shots. This is all a personal preference though... I prefer perfect, or ever-so-slightly under-exposed shots. The best way to learn is to try it all out... bracket if you have to, and take note of the changes you make.
As for what film you use, shoot whatever you like. Fuji and Kodak give great results, but I strictly use K25 or K64 because I trade. If you want to trade, Kodachrome is a must. I refuse stuff that's NOT Kodachrome, simply because I'm not sure about its longevity. KR is proven, Fuji hasn't been around long enough to say for sure. When you spend lots of money in this hobby, I'd like to stick with a "sure-thing" instead of a "well, maybe" type of film.
What other people think of you is none of your business!
Blackened From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 12, posted (11 years 12 months 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 1798 times:
Another question Thomas:
When I shoot a white body which fills the complete frame the camera will make it look normally exposed just by a short exposure time and a corresponding F stop. So you are controlling your F stop yourself, right? But the camera selects a corresponding exposure time, doesn't it? So it's again dependent on the camera meter. If the camera measures it as a bright picture it will use a short exposure time and the background will be too dark. And the other way round of course.
I agree with what you're saying when the conditions are difficult. For example a dusk shot. This won't work well with a programmed mode. On a normal, sunny day the background like runway, grass, buildings or even other aircraft won't be much darker than the aircraft you're pointing at. So there won't be many problems.
Thomasphoto60 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 3723 posts, RR: 25 Reply 13, posted (11 years 12 months 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 1762 times:
Hi Blackend and Hawaiian717,
First allow me to apololgize for what may have seemed as an incoherent last post. I was fighting off a rather nasty cold, thus the poor punctations and mis-spells as well as other typos.
As for your questons. Perhaps I am missing something, but when someone mentions 'programed' in refrence to the camera's functions, I am thinking that the program function takes over complete contol of the camera's operation, including aperture and shutter, not leaving the photographer with any way to alter the f stop or shutter. For me, especially with chromes that is not an option. Now I readily admit that I have not used any camera's programmed mode since 1978. I have probably owned or used every type of Canon camera (save for the consumer brand EOS models) since the AE1-Program, so perhaps the program modes on today's cameras may have advanced to the point that my comments and advice are not relevant to this thread and even some 10-15 years out of date. I currently own 2 EOS 1Ns and an EOS 3 so and on my next venture to the airport, I will try one of the program modes on a bright white aircraft on a sunny day and let the camera decide what exposure to use leaving me only with the task of composing the shot. I'll post the results.
Regardless of the results, I will still prefer manual shooting. Frankly I like the idea of controlling the camera, not the other way around. And like Rob Rindt, I bracket the hell out of my shots.
Blackened From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 15, posted (11 years 12 months 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 1749 times:
I'm still curious as you can see: Can you tell me how you're shooting aircraft? What modes are you using. Which settings do you control. The EOS 1 and 3 are excellent cameras so there should be no problem with the program mode. Do you have the P mode on these cameras? I guess so. The camera selects both av and tv and you can still change the av so the camera will follow with the tv so the picture will always have more or less the same brightness. That work.
Thomasphoto60 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 3723 posts, RR: 25 Reply 16, posted (11 years 12 months 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 1750 times:
In essence it is a method of making a series of shots darker or lighter by opening or closing your aperture(f stop) from your correct f stop setting. For example you have a setting of f8 you may want to open up your f stop to f6.7 (1/2 stop) or f5.6 (1 full stop) this will overexpose your image( I personally would not recommend going beyond 1/2 stop). Conversely the same is true in the opposite direction, should you want to underexpose your shots.
This technique is most useful with stationary subjects. Trying to bracket a zooming 747 on a take off run is not that easy in manual mode, cameras such as the EOS 1N though do offer AEB (Autoexposure Bracketing) which is very useful for said situations.
Bodobodo From Canada, joined May 2000, 553 posts, RR: 13 Reply 17, posted (11 years 12 months 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 1755 times:
Generally bracketting means taking the shot with a range of different exposures. Probably the most common is to set the camera to take a shot at the F-stop that the camera suggests and then a shot either half or one full stop above and below. Not all cameras support this an automatic feature (you can obviously make the exposure changes manually) and depending on the settings you can have quite a variety of bracketting options. The drawback, of course, is that it does use a lot more film but makes it much more likely that at least one of the exposures will be exactly what you want. I don't do this frequently except for really important photos since I can't afford to use that much film but I can see it being most useful for stationary subjects where you can take exactly the same photo with a different set of exposures. It's probably not as useful with a moving target since the ideal exposure could change from one second to another.
Thomasphoto60 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 3723 posts, RR: 25 Reply 18, posted (11 years 12 months 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 1750 times:
I guess I a bit of a dinosaur when it comes to shooting. I shoot 99% of my images, whether aviation or others in Manual mode, no automation, just 20 years of shooting experince is what I rely on. Now, with 'Tv' (Shutter Priorty) you select the shutter and the camera selects the appropriate aperture, but you can change the aperture at will and ignore the camera's recommened f stop. 'Av' is of course aperture priorty and this is where you select your desired f stop and the camrea selects the correct shutter speed, again like the f stop in Tv mode the shutter in Av mode can be changed. And yes these cameras both 'p' modes.
Upon reviewing the posts in this topic, I have pulled out some of the manuals for the cameras that I use and frankly was a little heartened to see that I am way behind the times when it comes to automated shooting. I was not aware that my EOS 1N or 3 had something called 'program shift' where the photographer is allowed to change either the shutter or f stop in 'p' mode. Still, while I may play around with this feature, I find that shooting manually is much more rewarding.
Speaking of manual photography, my favourite camera is still my Leica M4P (12 years and still going strong, actually this camera was made in 74'as I bought it 2nd hand in '89'), no meter, no program anything.....just good old fashioned photography!
Gerardo From Spain, joined May 2000, 3480 posts, RR: 34 Reply 20, posted (11 years 12 months 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 1712 times:
Once and for all, question to the "hard core slide shooters": Do you suggest to underexpose when shooting with slides, or not? And I am talking now about sunny weather, normal aircraft (i.e. white fuselages with boring liveries) and zooms of about 150-250mm.
dominguez(dash)online(dot)ch ... Pushing the limits of my equipment
Mikephotos From United States of America, joined Oct 2000, 2923 posts, RR: 56 Reply 21, posted (11 years 12 months 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 1718 times:
That's a very hard question to answer. It depends on a lot of things, mainly your personal preference on the final image. I usually underexpose normal shots by -0.3 or -0.7. Based on my shooting experience of certain areas/spots at my local airport, I modify that to get the final exposure I want. So, what I would suggest is to experiment or try bracketing a few shots. Find a plane that is parked, shoot it at no compensation, - 1/2 stop, -1 stop, + 1/2 spot, +1 stop. That should give you a good range and see which slide you prefer.
As mentioned, I personally love my slides to be slightly underexposed/dead-on rather than slightly over-exposed.