View Full Version : Photo Thread: Summer 2006

06-08-2006, 08:30:47
Another edition of the photo thread. I've recentely purchased a Fuji S7000 camera. It's absolutely fantastic and there are a squabillion features I've not managed to get my head around!

I thought I'd try and post one or two pictures every few days so I can track my progress.



06-08-2006, 08:35:57
:lol: great pics matt

06-08-2006, 08:43:37
Excuse the scummy bathroom. We're moving house in a few weeks. :)

06-08-2006, 08:48:38
The S7000 is a great camera, I still have mine even though I've upgraded now.

Fantastic pictures, especially the second one.

06-08-2006, 12:19:03
Photo threads are the best. Nice pictures.

Matt, you should get familiar with the apeture settings on your camera next. With a higher apeture the depth of field is reduced, so the background of the picture would be a lot less focused; really drawing the eye to the main subject.

06-08-2006, 13:02:43
Thanks for the tip.

I actually did try that - I set it to F2.8 but the shutter speed was a little too slow to capture it clearly. When I reduced the shutter speed the photo was a little too dark. Is there anyway to compensate with that, would I have to fiddle with the white balance or set the ISO a little higher?

It's a bit overwhelming when you first stick the camera on manual setting - I'm just going with trial and error at the moment.

Scabrous Birdseed
06-08-2006, 13:08:52
Well, one way to do it (with fairly static targets) would be to use a tripod and leave the shutter slow. That rules, really old-school photography.

You can also fiddle with the ISO numbers if you like.

A third way to reduce depth of vision is by zooming in and standing at a distance. (This is one of the reasons all sports photographers, who have to use really really fast shutter speeds, inevitably use telephoto lenses.) Of course, that will also compress the picture...

Scabrous Birdseed
06-08-2006, 13:11:09
(If you're going to do any after-processing like White-balancing or manually setting lightness you might as well do it in Photoshop later. At which point you can cheat and blur the stuff manually anyway. :D)

06-08-2006, 13:19:19
I went for a walk with my son to feed the ducks and I decided to take the camera along. Here are the results:




06-08-2006, 13:20:23
Ah, crap - photobucket has resized them all to a silly size. I'll have to reduce the quality of them and re-upload them... Grr!

edit: That's better!

The camera has really good zoom capabilities. It's 6*Optical - 3.2 Digital; although I must admit - I'd LOVE a long lens (no innuendos intended!)

06-08-2006, 14:59:41
thats one of the reasons I upgraded. your not going to be able to get the background much further out of focus that that on the S7000. Because its still got a small sensor close to the lens its its depth of field is much larger than the same aperture size on a DSLR. On the other hand that makes it pretty good for landscapes. You can get a telephoto extender that screws onto the end of the lens too. As for ISO 200 is good on that camera but 400 starts to get quite noisy and 800 is really rough.

In general I just left it on aperture priority mode (A) and let it sort out the shutter speed for me.

06-08-2006, 15:41:02
Yeah, I leave it on aperture priority too, usually turned up to about f14 for shots like the ones at the top of this thread.

Also adjusting the Levels in photoshop can change an ordinary greyscale image into a starker more film noir-type shot.

I took the liberty of doing this example (I changed the depth of field a bit too).


06-08-2006, 17:51:09
How do you adjust DOF in Photoshop?

Really nice photos, BTW.

06-08-2006, 17:56:26
I cheat. I do a subtle gaussian blur on the whole picture, then use the history brush to unblur the parts I want to be in focus. It's not an ideal method.

Apparently Photoshop CS2 has a perspective blur which sort of simulates DOF, but i've not used it myself.

06-08-2006, 18:03:09
I need to break down and buy a copy of photoshop.

06-08-2006, 18:32:55
pretty much the same as i would do. Not sure I would push the levels quite that far, its gone a little high key for my liking.

did the same DOF fudge on this one - couldnt get the background out of focus far enough with the s7000


Scabrous Birdseed
06-08-2006, 19:11:23
(There's about half a dozen ways to fake a background blur in photoshop - I'd do it using layer properties. I know of at least one guy who'd definately do it using a mask.)

08-08-2006, 09:29:06
Three more pictures:




08-08-2006, 09:30:15
you look old in the last pic

08-08-2006, 09:31:02
It's been a hard life.

08-08-2006, 09:31:57
...and here are two more:



08-08-2006, 10:23:55
Originally posted by Asher
Really nice photos, BTW.

Asher in unexpectedly nice comment shocker!

*End Is Forever*
08-08-2006, 10:28:58
Where are you moving to?

08-08-2006, 10:34:43
Conway Avenue in Clifton. It's a really nice 3 bedroom semi detached on a quiet cul-de-sac. Also there is nothing behind the house for about 3 miles and it's on the edge of a huge valley overlooking Prestwich and Manchester City Centre.

We're buying the house from a retired couple who have lived there for 30 years so the house is in wonderful condition. The decor is a little old fashioned but all the downstairs has new hardwood flooring and the upstairs carpet is really warm and thick!

The only thing we're planning on doing when we move in is minor redecorating and putting a new modern kitchen with Funko style granite surfaces.

*End Is Forever*
08-08-2006, 10:43:07
Sounds good. :)

08-08-2006, 11:03:45
We're just waiting for the survey results and, if all goes well, we should be moving in 6 weeks.

Qaj the Fuzzy Love Worm
08-08-2006, 16:41:20
According to statistics, cul-de-sacs are more dangerous environments for children, which is contrary to popular belief.

08-08-2006, 21:00:46
There are some great photos there, Matt. Cute kid too. :D

08-08-2006, 21:30:35
Originally posted by Qaj the Fuzzy Love Worm
According to statistics, cul-de-sacs are more dangerous environments for children, which is contrary to popular belief.

That's because Venom drives around in cul-de-sac neighborhoods looking for kids to run over. Serves them right for playing in the street.

08-08-2006, 21:57:59
I love cul de sacs in GTA san andreas.

11-08-2006, 11:56:59
Originally posted by MattHiggs
I actually did try that - I set it to F2.8 but the shutter speed was a little too slow to capture it clearly. When I reduced the shutter speed the photo was a little too dark. Is there anyway to compensate with that, would I have to fiddle with the white balance or set the ISO a little higher?

Smaller F number = greater aperture
Greater aperture = more light
More light = ability to use faster shutter speed

So why would you need to reduce the speed ? This would reduced in an over-exposed photograph... Unless you meant increase ? This is a bit confusing.

Anyway, to answer your question, yes you could play with ISO (but doing so you usually lose picture quality because of noise as some pixels from the CCD will be saturated). I don't think white balance could help in this situation. Can you alter EV (Exposure Value)?

I recommend you read this excellent site, and in particular the following articles

Nice pics anyway.

11-08-2006, 13:47:18
he means reduce the shutter value - on the S7000 and almost every other camera I have had it shows the shutter speed as X when its actually 1/X.

So by reducing the speed setting he's setting a faster shutter speed.

Cos its digital you could always take the shot underexposed and fix it in PS. Not as good and will be more noise but it does work