'Cos I sleep in alot, most of my photos are taken in the afternoon. This often creates problems with available lighting. Heres an example, Wich is of the local railway station. It was taken as part of a shoot for a local comp, but, along with the others was not entered.
Problems:
1) Poor Dynamic Range- Because the sun was behind the building, the light meter on the camera I was using had trouble picking an exposure time (I was using auto settings with a 19 Year old Nikon SLR)). As a result the film ended up bieng under exposed to the subject I was Trying to 'shoot' (The building).
Advice on building new professional web-site::
the chain which 'may' result in poor problem resolution or execution of your requests. Project planning may not be as rigid or even non existent 3.
http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview/id/69675.htmlHOME |
2) Light 'Glare'- Also the result of poor planning, The photo was taken with the camera sitting on an angle wich allowed the sun to glare in the 28mm WideField lens I was using
3) Film Grain- Poor Planning again (Three strikes I'M out!)
I had a stockpile of Kodak Max Versitility ISO 400 Film I was using up, which quite simply put is too damn grainy.
The Photo:
http://img78.photobucket.com/albums/v250/NightVision2004/Buildings/Frame15.jpg
Lessons Learned-
1) Check your location prior to the shooting date to establish the best time of the day and angle to do a shot.
2) Avoid ISO 400 Film. Try to used the best film for the job. I'm currently Experimenting with Kodak's 'High Definition' ISO 200 film. I am aware that the visibility of film grain is enhanced when I scan it onto Computer with the Canon 3200F scanner I use.
3) Not something that affected this photo, bust has had a negative effect on previous photo's I've taken- Have your film developed by the best business in your town/ city. This prevent's Arrogant shop attendee's Leaving fingerprints and scratches on your film. This is especially important in my case, as any defects on the negative are amplified when I scan it onto computer. At the place I have it done now, It costs me $7 Aus for developing Alone or $16 Aus for Developing AND printing.
4) You might also notice small white 'clumps' on the photo. Thes are small pieces of fluff that are on the scanner. This problem was easily preventable, however I failed to take the time to clean the scanner prior to scanning the frame.
All in all, I was very careless when I took this photo. Beware not to make the same mistakes I did. Also I should mention that no psot scanning editing was applied to this photo
 Red Hat's Rough Recovery From CFO Exit
 Windows Live Finds a New, Pre-installed Home
|
Poor Planning 
PRINT
Add to favorites