« first day (258 days earlier)      last day (3906 days later) » 

1:14 AM
@JayLancePhotography hey on photo.stackexchange.com/questions/12113/… you talked about building a light sensitive intervalometer - did you actually?
i was thinking about building an advanced remote with some interalometer stuff and sensor inputs and it doesn't seem like it would be THAT hard. I'm hung up more on a workable IE remote design than the EE of it
 
 
1 hour later…
2:25 AM
@rfusca I thought about doing something similar awhile back, but my project never got off the ground. The trickier parts seemed to be decoding the IR remote codes used by my camera.
 
@Sean my camera doesn't have IR, so i'm thinking about implementing a small RF receiver with a tiny mcu that caches the intervalometer settings and does them via a cable and just mounts with velco on the camera
i cut my remote cable in half and put a stereo jack on it, so to interface with the shutter i just ground a couple of pins together
 
@rfusca Ah, I was motivated by the fact that my camera only has IR, without a cable release.
 
ah, ic
well i'm gonna make the remote first and then see about modifying it to RF
the rf is the less important part to me
 
There is a lot of fun electronics stuff related to photography. It's a shame our sister site is so ill-tempered.
 
@Sean ya, there's some neat stuff. they're not ...ill-tempered, the line for their site is just very, VERY specific
 
2:41 AM
@rfusca Yes, but their long road to find that line, as well as their name, has made it harder for other sites to get started. It only becomes apparent just where they choose to draw their line when you unknowingly try to cross it.
They started out as Electronics and Robotics. Now they have dropped robotics and seemingly most of electronics, too!
 
lol
 
3:10 AM
I was just reading Matt Grum's answer to photo.stackexchange.com/questions/12104/… where he states: Increasing ISO whilst keeping shutter-speed/aperture constant does not increase noise. I am wondering if the same applies to high ISO film.
 
@rfusca I sure have, but I'd be lying if I said that I built anything 'from scratch,' or completely on my own. What I built is Aurduino-based, has an external light-meter which informs the intervalometer allowing it to dynamically adjust my camera for the available light. Theoretically this allows smooth day-to-night timelapses, but I'm actually still working out the kinks on it. :-)
Well... I was working out the kinks and then winter hit, and then my wife had a baby. Now I'm just waiting to get back to working out the kinks. :-)
The princcipal resource I used was: photosbykev.com/wordpress/2010/05/20/… and my unit looks very similar to his.
The code I used is slightly modified from the code available here: roamingdrone.wordpress.com/2009/03/25/…
 
@JayLancePhotography mine would be essentially arduino based
certainly looks nice
 
Yeah, and for the most part it works well too... I think the kinks are mostly software-based and are principally there because I had to make some code modifications and I'm not a programmer... I'll get 'em ironed out this summer though. It's just been too cold to really play around with timelapses over this winter.
 
@JayLancePhotography electrically it seems pretty simple
 
3:23 AM
right, thats what i was thinking - most of the magic is in the software
 
@rfusca Yeah, it wasn't too difficult to set up at all. Total cost was about $40 + an Arduino board...
 
its little more than a light sensor,arduino, some buttons, and the optocouplers to hook up to shutter release
 
Yep.
The expensive parts are the LCD and the light sensor.
 
eh
lcd $1.50
 
3:24 AM
And you could cut costs on the LCD if you didn't want such a cool blue backlight. :-P
 
arduino 13
light sensor is only 6
for projects like that - this can save some dough - shop.moderndevice.com/products/rbbb-kit
 
"Expensive" in terms of electronic components... Not expensive in comparison to... say... a new camera. :-)
 
ya
 
I did say total cost was about $40. :-)
 
Speaking of new cameras
 
3:25 AM
@JayLancePhotography indeed
 
if the Canon 5D 3 doesn't show up soon...what should I get instead?
I gotta replace my 450D...that thing is holding me back.
 
@jrista Nikon D7000 ;)
LOL
 
lol
 
5DmkII. Duh.
;-)
 
I would, but I'm already heavily invested in Canon lenses
I'd get the 5D2 if it was available
since the quake, its gone EVERYWHERE
 
3:26 AM
1DmkIV?
:-)
 
hmm
I guess if I can make some good dough on stocks and commodities...I might be able to drop $6k
 
I went to this party tonight and there were 14 Nikon DSLRs and 2 Canon - i was stunned
 
still a hard sell
 
7D. Hard to go wrong with any of those three models...
 
wow...thats unusual
yeah...7D
 
3:27 AM
ya, it really was
 
Probably I'd classify them in that order, even.
 
thats a pretty good price
is that APS-C or APS-H?
 
7D is APS-C.
 
hmm
 
1DmkIV is APS-H.
 
3:28 AM
7D is nice
that would definitely help the wildlife and bird photos
 
@JayLancePhotography btw, if you're sourcing electronic parts like LCDs again, make sure to check here allelectronics.com/make-a-store/category/365/…
 
4:02 AM
@rfusca Good to know. Couldn't quite tell you where I got some of the parts... I know I got the Arduino from Sparkfun (yes, yes, they are the most expensive option... But they had the friendliest shipping options for getting things fast and in small quantities... At that time, anyway)... and I probably got a few of the parts from Mouser...
 
 
1 hour later…
5:29 AM
Oh
so that's why stars twinkle and planets don't
 
6:14 AM
hmm, I guess I'm just a tad skeptical of that
there are certainly much larger stars than the one photographed there
and they still twinkle
mars has a specific emission band, as it is absorbing most light and only reflecting light in a certain band
where as a star generally emits light in a very broad band
mars still flickers a bit if you view it at night, too
stars probably waver in color as well as intensity because they are emitting a broader bandwidth of light than a planet
but both stars and planets still encounter turbulent atmospheric refraction
 
 
6 hours later…
12:30 PM
@EvanKrall oh! that makes sense. cool. @jrista: even the larger stars are still far away enough that they're effectively point sources. See eso.org/public/news/eso9706
The diameter of planets is roughly three orders of magnitude larger than that, so, very roughly, the apparent disk of a planet has something like a million times more area than that of even the apparently-largest star.
 
 
2 hours later…
2:28 PM
(Orders of magnitude in the decimal sense, not the traditional astronomy-brightness sense.)
 
3:19 PM
@JayLancePhotography I wonder if its possible to get away with this sparkfun.com/products/9768
same thing but no sensitivity or scaling controls
 
3:49 PM
all you really care about is the change in light in relation to what it means for exposure. I'm not sure i wouldn't skip alot of the complicated and device specific stuff for generating actual seconds and let the user set a time and then just move it up and down in proportion to the light reading
This is most definitely not a CW candidate to me.
1
Q: Street art photography. What are your suggestions for this photograph?

ShobanI was walking through streets of San Francisco and found this interesting advertisement. How do I make photographs of these attractive? How would you capture this shot? Any advice? Note : Photography is my hobby so please excuse me if this is not a valid question :)

 
@rfusca thank god you said that so I didn't have to. :)
 
lol
@mattdm damn, its accumulating answers
its a bad precedent to set
 
@rfusca agreed. But I'm following my official policy of Trying to Chill Out About Things. :)
 
@mattdm lol
 
4:19 PM
So, shall I go ahead and edit it?
:)
 
@mattdm well i don't think you could possibly edit it honestly....it needs the photog to say "I don't like X about it, how do i fix that" at best
right now, it just needs to be closed i think
its pretty much the definition of too subjective
 
You know what doesn't work on this site? Offering bounties.
 
@mattdm SO TRUE
 
Does it work on the other stack exchange sites? Here, either you get a good answer pretty quickly, or else never exactly what you were looking for.
 
i'm not sure
 
4:34 PM
It does increase visibility, getting more views and usually more upvotes, for both the question, and, somewhat ironically, the existing answers.
 
btw - i don't feel like your edit focused it more - the subject being interesting was kind of implied and other you just asked "what else"
 
@rfusca well, you're right that there isn't much to work with.
 
@mattdm yup, i'm not sure i've ever noticed a bounty and then saw a better answer come in
 
@rfusca I added "the existing one is boring". I actually had a little more strong language than that, but I backed off. :)
 
lol
 
 
2 hours later…
6:29 PM
Sooo... Are we tackling dSLR video questions at photo-SE? I remember talking about it at some point, but I don't remember if we ever came to a conclusion...
We seem to be answering some, and closing others so maybe it would be good to firm up a line in the sand on what 'is' and 'isn't' on topic?
Or not... Just thinking out loud. :-)
 
@JayLancePhotography ya, we're pretty wishy-washy right now
and apparently on "feedback/critique" questions as well
 
6:50 PM
I think we need to close out the lightpole question, personally... And voted as such...
I think the video question that is front page right now needs to be closed too... We don't want to start answering video editing questions...
Having said that, I do think that there are some video questions that could easily be on-topic here.
 
@JayLancePhotography ya, @jrista and I were discussing that the other evening
i think we would need to be really, really defined on where the line is for dslr video
 
I agree...
 
and when/if the video site comes up - where do the questions go then?
 
Since there isn't a video-SE site at this point to some extent they just get closed with no referral elsewhere... Too bad, so sad. It's not ideal, but... What else can we do?
 
is it just related to the technical aspects of dslr video? or the creative side of film - which isn't really camera specific
 
6:54 PM
@JayLancePhotography really?
 
Absolutely.
There's quite a bit of overlap between filmmaking and still photography. Especially in the technical areas like lenses, lens properties, transmission of light, lighting, etc.
Composition.
Etc.
That's not to say that all those topics belong on photo-SE... Only saying that someone knowledgeable in still photography can answer a broad range of video/film questions with some level of expertise...
 
well, open it up on meta and lets have some discussion. The biggest reason I'm tempted to allow it is not because I'm super interested in video (although I could be in the future), but because we're turning away a significant amount of traffic and pointing them back into the wilderness of the Internet
at least throw it out on meta, i know your feelings on meta though ;)
 
Yeah... We don't seem to manage to get a lot done over on meta. Discussion, though... We got a lot of that. :-)
 
but Jeff and SE management pipes in on meta
and they count
 
Meh. Not really...
 
7:09 PM
@JayLancePhotography hows the biz been?
 
I'm ramping up into wedding season right now... The next 4 weeks I've got weddings, I get one week off, and then I have 3 more... whew
But it's a good problem to have... I'm not complaining. :-)
 
sure
whats a ballpark price for you to shoot a wedding? (if you don't feel comfortable saying, i would understand)
 
We'll see if I'm going to be able to juggle putting in an appropriate amount of time at photo-SE over the next couple of months. ;-)
@rfusca I have packages that range from around $2k to just above $10k...
 
@JayLancePhotography cool
 
I don't have that many takers for my highest-end package, though... :-) But that's OK... Marketers will tell you that the highest-end package is there to make the mid-range packages seem more reasonable to the average buyer. :-)
 
7:16 PM
ya
 
7:42 PM
If you're in a position to cast a close vote on these, please do:
0
Q: Question about using the DeShaker plug-in for VirtualDub

PaulHey Guys, I've been using my Canon 7D primarily for photography and am starting to get into the video realm with it. I realize this question may not belong here, but the reality is that the line between photography and videography is becoming very thin and I believe photographers should embrace ...

1
Q: How can I make interesting photographs of interesting things found on the streets?

ShobanI was walking through streets of San Francisco and found this interesting advertisement: The subject is obviously interesting, but the image here is very straightforward and feels comparatively boring. How can I translate the interest of the subject into an equally-compelling photograph?

 
i have :)
 
@JayLancePhotography I'm on the fence about this one. It's kind of vague, but Jerry Coffin's answer is decent enough.
Is it a worse question than photo.stackexchange.com/questions/12012/…?
 
@mattdm if we're not going to close that giraffe one - how can we justify closing any critique/feedback style Q?
 
The question isn't really about that specific picture. It'd stand without the example. It's kind of vague, but I don't think it's meant to be a feedback (let alone @Jay's critique) question.
It's a beginner question, for sure, and maybe it really needs to be answered with "practice a lot and develop an eye", or something like that — which is poor for SE.
But man, I'll take five of those for every photo.stackexchange.com/questions/11880/…
 
Well the original question was " How do I make photographs of these attractive? How would you capture this shot? Any advice?" - thats kinda the definition of what we avoid. Your edit makes it a lil' more general about not just THAT shot, but doesn't change the fact that its wildly vague and can't possibly have a correct answer.
@mattdm ya, those suck lol. I'll give you that
and as far as photo.stackexchange.com/questions/12012/… goes - its kinda "neat" information, but I don't think we're the appropriate place for it. But nobody had a strong enough opinion about it i think
 
7:52 PM
@rfusca The original title was "How to take better street art or interesting photographs?" — it only got more specific after the poor confused new user tried to follow the instructions to focus the question.
And I think that falls under "photo-SE needs to have some subjective questions".
 
@JayLancePhotography Here is where I have a hard time casting a mod vote on questions like these... By the time it gets to my attention, there are already a bunch of answers, and many are pretty decent. The question, while open ended, certainly seems to be "answerable".
I have no problem if you guys vote to close it...but I feel like I shouldn't cast a mod vote on it since there is so much community activity around it.
Do you guys disagree?
 
Sounds reasonable to me
@jrista — you should put your comments about the exit pupil size and cost into your answer on f/<1 lenses.
 
...which comments?
 
I already voted it up but that would make it better. :)
"Remember that the physical aperture size as calculated from relative aperture is only as viewed through the front lens element (which tends to magnify the innards a bit.) The true physical size of the aperture is usually not quite that large. It is possible to correct for an aperture larger than the mount with more optics...but thats part of where the added cost of wider apertures comes into play."
 
I may have deleted it...I got rid of some of my comments when I was in a hazy sleepless daze
ooh
the comment on the other answer
 
8:02 PM
right. :)
 
@jrista Fair enough. Surely the video editing question needs to be put out of our misery, though. No?
 
@mattdm: how is it now?
@JayLancePhotography Yes, done. That one definitely does not belong here.
Regarding video related stuff...I think the line should be drawn at what is capable with existing still photography HARDWARE.
If someone who is a photographer has a question about how to use the video features of their fancy new DSLR, I don't think we should be turning them away. If someone has a question about how to focus while recording video with their fancy new DSLR, I don't think we should turn them away.
3
If someone starts asking how to compose some green-screen clips with CG, that is definitely off topic.
heh, just hit the daily rep cap
 
@jrista if it were my question I'd give it the checkmark. Although to be very, very pendantic, f/0.9 is one third stop less than f/1, and f/0.85 is half a stop. :)
 
@jrista That seems like a pretty natural place to draw the line to me as well... Prevents excursions into 'the wonderful world of DIY steadicams,' 'greenscreen shenanigans,' and the like...
 
It means the line is going to naturally creep as hardware with greater convergence becomes more and more common.
 
8:17 PM
Seems like a 'cross that bridge when we come to it' sorta thing to me. Hopefully at some point the video-SE group will get off the ground and there'll be a more natural transition pathway to offer folks...
It really surprises me that video-SE hasn't managed to take off yet. That seems like such a natural fit for the SE platform...
 
There's several duplicates. I was lookin' at the wrong one.
76
Video and Film Production

Proposed Q&A site for professional, student and enthusiast directors, producers, writers, editors, engineers, technicians and cinematographers.

Currently in commitment.

is the more-popular.
 
@mattdm "more popular" , but not even close though, despite being around for awhile
 
I've been rolling over my commitment every couple of weeks for the past 4 months waiting for it to hit critical mass, but for some reason it just... doesn't.
 
it sounds like we need to accept DSLR video questions...whats it going take for that to happen?
we'd really need to put something in the FAQ i'd think
 
I don't know if we need to. I can also use my camera to hammer nails......
 
8:27 PM
...and quite possibly you should. ;-)
 
I know, right? :)
 
@mattdm ya, but the imstupid.stackexchange.com is nearly up ;)
 
:)
But seriously, I prefer the focus to remain on still photography.
 
hmmm interesting
 
8:41 PM
On a quasi-related note... Seems like astronomy-SE is right on the verge of kicking off. Lots of potential for overlap between them and us in the astrophotography department. Great opportunity for someone to get that 'precognitive' badge they've been hankerin' for. Get in on it while it lasts... :-)
 
8:58 PM
hey
 
hi
 
how's it going?
 
9:21 PM
slowly, apparently. :)
 
haha
did you get out at the weekend with the camera?
 
9:47 PM
Yes! Had the Lensbaby fisheye lens to play with. Fun.
 
cool, get anything keep worthy?
 
Unsurprisingly, it's quite hard to use. :)
 
yeah they do look a pain in the ass to get to grips with
 
10:05 PM
You do anything noteworthy?
 
the saturday airshow I didn't go as the weather was pants. Spent all day Sunday photographing working dogs at a trial - just looking at the results now
about 30 dogs... :S
 
@JayLancePhotography which badge is that?
 
It's the one you get for participating in the beta...
Oh, my bad... Precog is if you were following before committment.
So I guess you can't get that one...
But you can get 'Beta'! :-)
 
 
1 hour later…
11:34 PM
I thought that was "Upholder"?
to follow through on a commitment?
 

« first day (258 days earlier)      last day (3906 days later) »