Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Question About Size To Shoot In/Settings  
User currently offlineairbusa322 From Australia, joined Apr 2009, 247 posts, RR: 0
Posted (4 years 1 week 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 5246 times:

Hey guys.

I got a 1000D (18/55 and 75/300) last week and am heading out to the airport today and try and get some basic shots. Just talking side on views, the easy stuff first.

I dont want to go all the way there and back knowing that I have done something wrong, example being wrong size. At the moment I have the current settings:
-Shooting in RAW 10M, 3888x2592? I wont be zooming too much obviously as there is plenty of room to crop, but is this too big? I do have Photoshop 8.
-AF
-ISO 400 (its cloudy today, no blue sky)
-AL focus is on.
-Picture Style. 3,0,0,0
Anything else? or is this wrong?

I am looking for advice or "compulsory" settings for me to get a shot uploaded.

Appreciate the help. Thanks

9 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 1, posted (4 years 1 week 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 5223 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Hi, I'll try and help you out best I can.

Quoting airbusa322 (Thread starter):
Shooting in RAW 10M, 3888x2592?

Shooting in RAW does take up a lot more memory, but gives you a lot more flexibility when fixing exposure and color issues. If you shoot Jpeg only and get the colors/exposure perfect, there's not much, if any, difference in terms of quality vs. shooting RAW and then converting.

Quoting airbusa322 (Thread starter):
I wont be zooming too much obviously as there is plenty of room to crop

No such thing as plenty of room to crop. Always do the least amount of cropping possible, as the more you crop, the more you magnify the flaws in an image. Cropping from 3800 to 3300 vs. 3800 to 2300 makes a huge difference. A general rule for my own uploads is that as a cropped image approaches 2000pix in size, the less chance there is that I'll be attempting to upload it. Anything under 2400pix means either the quality is crystal clear perfect, or I'm desperate to see the photo uploaded. This is partly because I have high standards for myself, and also because I upload at 1200pix.

Quoting airbusa322 (Thread starter):
-AF

Yes.

Quoting airbusa322 (Thread starter):
ISO 400 (its cloudy today, no blue sky)

No. If your aim is for upload here, never go higher than you have to. ISO100 or 200, whatever is your base, should be good enough. And I hate to dissuade you, but if it's cloudy, I stay home unless I'm really really bored. Poor light is the death of many many attempted uploads we see here.

Quoting airbusa322 (Thread starter):
AL focus is on.

Not sure what AL focus is. Maybe you mean AI?

Quoting airbusa322 (Thread starter):
Picture Style. 3,0,0,0

Have no idea what that is, must a Canon thing. If you're shooting RAW, I doubt it matters.

Quoting airbusa322 (Thread starter):
Anything else?

I would recommend shooting in Av mode, and either getting a good photography book or at least doing some research to find out why that would be a good idea.

Good luck, and have fun!

Dana


User currently onlineconinpa From Luxembourg, joined May 2005, 244 posts, RR: 6
Reply 2, posted (4 years 1 week 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 5210 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD SCREENER

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 1):
Quoting airbusa322 (Thread starter):
Picture Style. 3,0,0,0

Have no idea what that is, must a Canon thing.

Yes this is Canon. Do not use that value, as the first setting (3) is the sharpening setting that the camera uses to produce your JPEG and can cause jaggies right from the beginning. Use 0,0,0,0 instead and process the sharpening in photoshop or other editing software.

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 1):
If you're shooting RAW, I doubt it matters.

Correct. Doesn't matter in RAW.

Good luck  
Patrick



Patrick De Coninck
User currently offlineairbusa322 From Australia, joined Apr 2009, 247 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (4 years 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 5191 times:

Yeah thanks for the info. I am completely new to this part of the industry, hence only taking basic shots, like those on approach.

I headed out to the airport before the first reply so the first thing that really let me down was the high ISO, left it on 400. So my shots are quite grainy, but I understand you can eliminate this via GIMP. I also found alot of my shots too big when I went to crop them. I cropped these down a little, still too big for Anet though, and I have basically done no editing at this point so be nice! Still learning the whole editing thing too.







[Edited 2010-08-14 03:43:46]

User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 4, posted (4 years 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 5183 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I can only tell two things from the images you've posted: they're the wrong size ratio, and they look dark/backlit. Size ratio needs to be within the 3x2 to 4x3 range. Perhaps you should take a good look through the rejection guide and the upload page before you go any further, and then come back to ask specific questions.

Any other comments or criticisms can't be made of your photos because they're much too small (640pix) to judge quality issues.


User currently offlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 5, posted (4 years 1 week 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 5180 times:

There are two ways of photographing aircraft - the A.net way or your own personal way. Never use this website and potential acceptances as guidelines. You should be doing it for you, not A.net; and if you are doing it for A.net then you're doing it for the wrong reasons.

Quoting coninpa (Reply 2):
Yes this is Canon. Do not use that value, as the first setting (3) is the sharpening setting that the camera uses to produce your JPEG and can cause jaggies right from the beginning

Use what you feel is best for you. I have always used (with four Canon DSLRs) the default sharpness setting of 3 and have never had issues with over-sharpened images. In fact most of my rejections these days are for soft. I also like the look +1 saturation gives me.

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 1):
No. If your aim is for upload here, never go higher than you have to. ISO100 or 200, whatever is your base, should be good enough. And I hate to dissuade you, but if it's cloudy, I stay home unless I'm really really bored. Poor light is the death of many many attempted uploads we see here.

I agree that cloudy skies can ruin your images but on the other hand I've taken some very unique shots under such conditions. I regularly use ISO400 (without noise reduction) to upload here - although I admit that grain will be less evident in a nicely-balanced sunny shot. Sometimes, if you want the shot, ISO400 is your only safeguard. I'm never discouraged from using it.

Finally, those images certainly aren't bad for a newbie. Only trouble is they are backlit, which occurs when either the sun is in your face (i.e. behind your subject) or there's a bright sky behind, but no sun falling on, your subject. Always ensure the sun is at least 100 degrees over either shoulder (behind you).

Karl


User currently offlineflipdewaf From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2006, 1568 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (4 years 1 week 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 5171 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I have only 2 pics on here and don't really have it as my aim to get them on here but I would say that ISO400 is fine. Maybe for this site it isn't the thing that they are looking for but for general photography then it matters not. Personally (and I think many people into photography would agree with me here) that grain looks substantially better than blurred images, hell I'd shoot ISO6400 if it was dark. Just keep practicing (learning how a camera works is easy) and remember that no one gets good pictures sat at their computer screen  .

Fred


User currently offlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 7, posted (4 years 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 5124 times:

Quoting flipdewaf (Reply 6):
Personally (and I think many people into photography would agree with me here) that grain looks substantially better than blurred images

You may only have two images here but that's the best piece of advice I've heard all week!

If I want to guarantee the shot I'll shoot at ISO400 no problem - whether A.net likes it or not. Indeed, it's a question of, "Do I want the shot or not?". Worry about Airliners.net later.

Karl


User currently offlinekukkudrill From Malta, joined Dec 2004, 1123 posts, RR: 4
Reply 8, posted (4 years 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 5091 times:

I agree with this 100 per cent

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 5):
Never use this website and potential acceptances as guidelines. You should be doing it for you, not A.net; and if you are doing it for A.net then you're doing it for the wrong reasons.

And with this

Quoting flipdewaf (Reply 6):
grain looks substantially better than blurred images

But shots that are neither blurred nor grainy would look better still in my opinion. Like flipdewaf says photography is a matter of practice, and if you practice taking long-distance shots at ISO100 to 200 you will learn to track your subject while holding the camera steady enough to get good shots. You never will if you keep shooting at ISO400 just for insurance.

I am assuming normal light of course.



Make the most of the available light ... a lesson of photography that applies to life
User currently offlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 9, posted (4 years 1 week 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 5055 times:

Sorry, perhaps I should have made my stance clearer. I don't prefer to shoot at ISO400 but sometimes you simply have no choice - and when presented with the 'no choice' option it doesn't particularly bother me upping the ISO. I can work almost as well with 400 as with 200.

If the light has dropped, I'm at 200mm (on my 70-200), already down to f/6.3 and the shutter isn't sufficient, then ISO 400 it is...

Karl


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Where To Shoot In Denver (DEN) posted Tue Apr 3 2001 18:43:19 by Bugman
LON-MAD - A Stop In ZRH - Long Enough To Shoot? posted Sun Oct 1 2006 15:00:44 by Glennstewart
Anything To See/shoot In Tulsa posted Wed Aug 31 2005 08:00:20 by Clickhappy
What Size Mode Do You Shoot In? posted Tue Oct 12 2004 07:04:40 by Romeokc10fe
D30 Question - Image Size In Pixels posted Sat Jan 12 2002 22:53:37 by Skymonster
Best-to-shoot-from Hotel In Heathrow posted Mon Nov 20 2000 13:31:09 by Mudozvon
Getting To Belvédère In BSL Without Car posted Wed Jun 23 2010 05:28:29 by Sezer
Question About Double posted Mon May 3 2010 16:20:59 by compussr
Where Is A Good Place To Spot In YYZ? posted Mon Apr 26 2010 12:28:45 by futurepilotyyz
Question About Double posted Fri Mar 19 2010 22:04:47 by dl767captain