Help me choose! I need a macro and color

Pages: 1 2

25.08.2009 11:47:00
Please advise! Used Canon Power Shot A620. Strongly staged rendition Nuzhet fotoap. no more than 17tys, considered Nicon CoolpixP80, Canon Power Shot A590IS, SonyW55. . . . . . . . Confused already. It is waiting for feedback. Rented nature, animals and flowers in large numbers.
 

25.08.2009 12:24:00

Hats nature, animals and flowers in large numbers.
For nature and animals do not know, but the shots of flowers also do "in large numbers."
So to be honest, that to get the right color color you without SLR with the ability to shoot in RAW can not do.
Yes and processing in Photoshop will have to master. With
kondachka on the machine flowers hardly turn out well even on SLR.

25.08.2009 13:24:00

Do not listen to a comrade, he is right only in part - in the sense that the presence of reflex with the ability to save files in RAW - is, of course, is good, but the lack thereof, did not fatally. And in some cases, even without taking into account the weight and compactness, as will be better Soap (macro, for example).
Here the unit, which I think suits you: http: // www. ixbt. com / digimage / fuji_fpf200exr. shtml
myself want to buy it to his advantage SLR.

25.08.2009 13:30:00

I would be in your place acquainted with the gallery and looked to be out there that you need. http: // fotkidepo. ru /? t = 4

25.08.2009 14:31:00
quote:
:
Please advise! Used Canon Power Shot A620. Strongly staged rendition Nuzhet fotoap. no more than 17tys, considered Nicon CoolpixP80, Canon Power Shot A590IS, SonyW55. . . . . . . . Confused already. It is waiting for feedback. Rented nature, animals and flowers in large numbers.


White balance is necessary to define precisely, and not on the car. Otherwise, none of SLR will not help. You can put
preset "sun", if you shoot into the sun, you can manually determine if the camera allows for something guaranteed to white or gray.

25.08.2009 14:37:00

White balance is necessary to determine exactly
By the way, yes, sensible advice.
Although, if you shoot a sunny day, then, in theory, all models have to cope well on the machine. And if in the shade, or even more so, with incandescent lamps, then there may already be a distortion. RAW so good, including that allows the subsequent conversion to JPG correct white balance and easier to correct than it can be made to JPG.

25.08.2009 14:46:00
quote:
:

White balance is necessary to determine exactly
By the way, yes, sensible advice.
Although, if you shoot a sunny day, then, in theory, all models have to cope well on the machine. And if in the shade, or even more so, with incandescent lamps, then there may already be a distortion. RAW so good, including that allows the subsequent conversion to JPG correct white balance and easier to correct than it can be made to JPG.

With flowers generally tricky, some colors (purple, burgundy) get very difficult, if not impossible, a bar of soap.

course, we need to RAW and SLR and color scale in the frame and AdobeRGB, but it's hard. Therefore, you should at least define the white balance correctly.

25.08.2009 15:21:00
A good starting point used to clarify - what do not like t. N. "Color rendition."

25.08.2009 15:50:00
firmware of CHDK for A620 and shoot at it the same in RAW. BB taste

25.08.2009 16:01:00
"In a lot of" flowers is a gesture, I can imagine redstavit. . . . . . . . and about the macro, I started with the Canon A 630, close to it is even nothing (for mylnichki) in terms of increasing, and if you want to "color (xs that the author means by the term" - work on the lighting and everything will be beam.

[...]


25.08.2009 16:14:00

not listen comrade. . . soap dish will be even better. . . he would like to buy plus to your SLR.
Council to buy a "plus" wholeheartedly support.


With flowers generally tricky, some colors (purple, burgundy) get very difficult, if not impossible, a bar of soap.
added that some shades of green too. Yes, all of the colors of fall out of the sRGB gamut and difficult stretch in RAW.
However, do not bother the author professionalism. Maybe she high accuracy in the transfer of the color is not required. If you shoot for myself, not for the catalog.

25.08.2009 16:24:00

Council buy "plus" wholeheartedly support.
Yes you know. . . I've been after a summer holiday spent with mirror, roughly figured. . . According to my landscape preferences good soap dish in very many cases - most, we can say - quite a would be on top. GRIP - "here and before dinner", ISO 200 on the same Fuji, which advised the girl, you can include.
So for macro and nature, and if there is no desire to comprehend the wisdom Shope and others like him, and if the weight and size are important - the most it.
What Fudge will shamelessly lie with flowers - do not believe. RAV would have it, course. . .

25.08.2009 17:08:00


I myself about the "buy plus" has long been thinking.
still "padded" fotik wife. But he was very outdated, so it's time to give her a new one.

25.08.2009 17:59:00

Used Canon Power Shot A620. Strongly staged rendition
not need another machine, buy a new virtually nothing gives your device is good enough for photographing flowers.
You need to learn how to use those that have, hints:
- manual white balance
- correct exposure
- good light (natural, natural + reflectors, timing and location shooting)
- only the minimum ISO
- perhaps a tripod if the light is not sufficient to Short excerpts
If you want specific comments that was made is not correct, put examples on http: // fotkidepo. ru /, comment on.

25.08.2009 18:09:00

not need another machine
+1
Canon A620 - a very worthy machine


Show examples of photos that do not suit you in color rendering and macro.

Here people have tried telepathy, I also try
the Regulations fotikom you have not read and shoot in Auto?

If I'm guessing that any other device also does not satisfy you, because there is not fotikom able to read minds

25.08.2009 19:00:00

course, we need to RAW and SLR and color scale in the frame and AdobeRGB
AdobeRGB - it's more what?

Yes, all of the colors of fall out of the sRGB gamut and difficult stretch in RAW.
something which stretches raw?

25.08.2009 19:08:00

AdobeRGB - it's more what?

[sarcasm Inc.]
for radical green. And extraordinary blue.
[sarcasm off]

25.08.2009 19:12:00

about, and I would like as a joke humor census the topic

25.08.2009 19:15:00

something which stretches raw?
colors come and pull the converter is not always possible to draw close to natural.

25.08.2009 19:19:00
I remember on the soap dish with red A630 somehow problematic was the output, roses, tulips, poppies and on SLR is not always "a natural" (about printing generally keep quiet).

25.08.2009 19:34:00

colors come and pull the converter is not always possible to draw close to natural.
I do not understand the logic of the phrase
quote:
Yes, all of the colors of fall out of the sRGB gamut and difficult stretch in RAW.
- what general link between sRGB and abbreviations RAW
- why pull the colors in the converter if they can twist it?

well, that is, if the "pull" the color red in the converter - what happens? here if the "twist" on his tsvetokolese - Get the can and green. if "pull." . . But such a question.

25.08.2009 20:41:00

with red somehow problematic was the output, roses, tulips, poppies
Yes, if you take the proper exposure, the red channel gets overloaded (the histogram).
So when photographing red flowers introduce the exposure compensation to -2. Then dance in the converter.


some general relationship between sRGB and abbreviations RAW
And you know how that image in RAW right to examine, without any conversion?
meant that work in dzhipege (space shoot cameras usually, sRGB) give worse results than editing in RAW.

why pull the colors in the converter if they can twist it?
Yes for me at least through the Kama Sutra, just to close to reality.

25.08.2009 21:55:00

And you know how that image in RAW right to examine, without any conversion?
What do you - do not know how?

meant that work in dzhipege (space shoot cameras usually, sRGB)
what is a "space soap box"?
and "space SLR" - it somewhere else, or what? and a space in the raw?

give worse results than editing in RAW.
"in the raw" nothing is usually the result of "changes in the raw" is never modified with raw master data.

25.08.2009 22:09:00
Branch some humorous.
And the colors are not satisfied? That want to achieve accurate color or that color shades in the pictures did not come out, such cartoon like others?

25.08.2009 22:49:00
Ooh, correct formulation of the question! Kenonistka or Nikonistka it in the shower? ?

25.08.2009 23:05:00

right question to ask! Kenonistka or Nikonistka it in the shower? ?
in the shower, it is likely to clean - well, who goes after him, the issue of complex and practically unsolvable in the absence of the author.
 

25.08.2009 23:16:00

Canon Power Shot A620
not expensive 17tys, considered Nicon CoolpixP80, Canon Power Shot A590IS, SonyW55. . . . . . . .

flea.

You need something like this?



26.08.2009 0:54:00

unsolvable in the absence of the author
Well intimidated abstruse comments or sigma 180.

26.08.2009 0:58:00

the course, the white balance to adjust.

26.08.2009 8:19:00
quote:
:
course, we need to RAW and SLR and color scale in the frame and AdobeRGB
AdobeRGB - it's more what?

Good calibrated monitors and inkjet printers have a wider color gamut than sRGB.
For RAW is, of course, it is still possible to change later. But even if you have a RAW, it does not mean the absence of difficulties in obtaining the desired color, as a minimum, you need to have a sample / remember to strive for. Adjustment is 2: tint and DH, when talking about playing a high-precision color, the flower will also have to measure kolormetrom

26.08.2009 8:32:00

when talking about high-precision color reproduction
doubt. Most likely it needs richness and depth of color. BB accurate colors when smke IMHO is not necessarily a thing.


Well intimidated abstruse comments or sigma 180
Telemakrik is a powerful thing

26.08.2009 8:52:00

Telemakrik is a powerful thing
Well, actually most of the shots of flowers I make it a telephoto 55-250.
Convenient - no need too close. Shadow of the photographer on the flowers is not falling. A scale with 1 m quite big turns.

26.08.2009 9:03:00

Good calibrated monitors and inkjet printers have a wider color gamut than sRGB.
dy you read the first post, what else calibrated monitors? ?
and then show how the result? only prints or your calibrated monitor?
For RAW is, of course, it is still possible to change later.
and what difficulties jpeg? there that can not be changed later?
But even if you have a RAW, it does not mean the absence of difficulties in obtaining the desired color, as a minimum, you need to have a sample / remember to strive for.
Is not the whole thing in a magical engine, "White balance"?

26.08.2009 9:40:00
Thank you all! Could not come earlier, problems with the Internet. Answer. . . . . I'm not blonde able to read the instructions and use the white balance:. But. . . . . . . do not exceed the above mentioned here color: burgundy, blue, red. and others like them! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
Quote: Do not need another machine, buy a new virtually nothing gives your device is good enough for photographing flowers.
You need to learn how to use those that have, hints:
- manual white balance
- correct exposure
- good light (natural, natural + reflectors, timing and location shooting)
- only the minimum ISO
All this does not improve the quality macro in He is really good, but the color. . . . . I do not use Photoshop. Consider what you need to shoot for the catalog. Is there no normal vehicles. I read in a review and see. . . . "Excellent color rendition," just thought someone faced with such a problem will tell. By the way, a friend Nicon Coolpix P60, is currently not on sale, so by car takes all shades of blue and red palette.
And about Fuji, now look, thanks.

26.08.2009 10:14:00

not go above mentioned here colors: burgundy, blue, red.
not use Photoshop. Consider what you need to shoot for the catalog.
Given the second statement, mission, IMHO, is practically feasible.
Do not assume that the picture from the unit is sent directly to the print catalog.
between photography and the printed catalog there preprintny process, where the struggle for the right color on paper are masters of their craft in special programs.

Is there no normal vehicles.
If you understand a normal machine, which on full automatic with minimal mental cost will allow the photographer to correct any conditions to record all the colors of nature, it is a miracle had not been invented.
And by the way, what you are going to evaluate the correctness of color - on the monitor or print?

26.08.2009 10:55:00
Examples of failures can be desperate?

26.08.2009 11:49:00

not use Photoshop. Consider what you need to shoot for the catalog. Is there no normal vehicles.
directory without photoshop, I think, in any way. . .
probably time for you to announce budget

26.08.2009 12:36:00

time for you to announce budget
already announced in the 1st post - up to 17 thousand. Yeah, right now, all the choir will advise the b / u SLR .

26.08.2009 12:53:00
Is it on the monitor and the printout will be a significant difference? Well, more on the monitor is necessary. And once again remark about full automatic. . . . . does not work adequately Ballance white. , My at least. And in the mean photoshop color correction? Here I am not in the subject, if so I would like to do without it. I do not understand the SLR, but do they have the advantage in this matter? And I said above, Nikon, it is positioned as poluprof. No worse than SLR or is it all nonsense?
climb in the pictures, there are no complex colors. I can not lay my-not in the city, is not at hand, and are not in color is not preserved.
Who else can say that sensible?

26.08.2009 13:38:00

Macro he is really good, but the color. . . . .
But color on error BB need to edit manually.


and what difficulties jpeg? there that can not be changed later?
A complexity simple: when adjusting the BB in zhopege suffers as in the case of RAV - BB anyway you want.

with a friend Nicon Coolpix P60, is currently not on sale, so by car takes all shades of blue and red palette.
In a strange bowl rice whiter. I would say that this soap dish is worse than the 620th Canon.

Put on your Canon SDK-firmware and get your hands on RAW. By the way let them know prompt - SDK makes it possible to install the BB on a white sheet?

Is the monitor and the printout will be a significant difference?
In 99% of cases - yes. the remaining 1% is rare literate monitor calibration the user, as well as Horsham minilab, normal paper and an experienced operator in the photo studio.

under photoshop understood color correction? Here I am not in the subject, if so I would like to do without it. I do not understand the SLR, but do they have the advantage in this matter?
SLR gives an advantage in the DD, the depth of field control, RAW-format, from which you can pull a lot more than mylnichnogo. I would say that from a mirrored zhopega everything runs much better than mylnichnogo RAV. In addition, all SLRs are able to put BB on a white sheet. I still think that you do not need a BB accuracy and color saturation. So to say "depth" of color.

And I said above, Nikon, it is positioned as poluprof. No worse than SLR or is it all nonsense?
Nonsense.

I'm not blonde able to read the instructions and use the white balance:
"I know that I know nothing - that is the ultimate truth, open me," (c).

Who else can say that sensible?
individual can only say that after seeing what you get, and comparing with what you want. Look on the Internet suitable examples, if you can not put your. Otherwise - discussion of a spherical horse in a vacuum.


most shots of flowers I make it a telephoto 55-250
If there are 70-300 telephoto with Stabia and more high-aperture telemakrika-fix prefer, of course, the latter. Bokeh prettier, more tears from the background.

Convenient - no need too close. This
here at what? I am sure that I go by the same "not bblizko" with 180 / macro as you do with 55-250 at 180mm zoom position. Shadows from the photographer at such risk factors, I usually do not see in the viewfinder.


PS. Kohli guides know how to read, search in google concepts: RAW, HDR. Perhaps the use of adjustments in RAW + BB use HDR to help something to squeeze a soap dish. Another soap box to take IMHO makes no sense.

You can also read:

http: // www. afanas. ru / ROF /
http: // www. afanas. ru / video / photo_zer. htm , 26. 08. 2009 13: 55]

26.08.2009 13:46:00
Who else can say that sensible?
without demonstrating inappropriate - no way. Since the
. "Wrong" may be a system error, and the camera does not depend.

26.08.2009 13:53:00

If not at hand the bad pictures, remember, bad color pictures were obtained when shooting outdoors or at home? If
home, then shot with flash or with a conventional light bulb?

26.08.2009 15:45:00
"... And asked crumb:" what is - right? what - bad? "..."


IMHO, to solve your problem, there are two ways:
first, you give examples of photos that you do not like and those that love and explanations that actually do not like. Joint efforts of trying to understand and help sort it out. I must say, way expensive. Be prepared, on the one hand to understand the color reproduction (starting from scratch), on the other hand that different people, but at different Monir results will be oh how different + personal preferences.
second way - you see with your own eyes the selected devices. Make a test pictures and choose the one whose color reproduction you personally like the most and at this stop fucked his brains to soar! Several dead-end path, t. To. Soapbox differ slightly, but may work

26.08.2009 16:10:00

EVM
most shots of flowers I make it a telephoto 55-250
If there are 70-300 telephoto with Stabia and more high-aperture telemakrika-fix prefer, of course, the latter. Bokeh prettier, more tears from the background.


and I did not mean to compare between a telephoto. Probably in my post after the word "tele" it was necessary to put a point.

Convenient - no need too close. This
here at what? I am sure that I go by the same "not bblizko" with 180 / macro as you do with 55-250 at 180mm zoom position. Shadows from the photographer at such risk factors, I usually do not see in the viewfinder.


explains why it is convenient to shoot telephoto, rather than fifty dollars or Shirikov. Again, without a thought telephoto compare with each other.
Flowers sometimes a stranger come in a fence, and sometimes on the lawn and can not walk.
And you mentioned objectives, alas, not in my budget.

26.08.2009 17:51:00

thank you! Went to read.
Unfortunately, I can not climb long in finding photos. (And as much as possible to understand the true color photo captured or not ). . dear relationship. Apparently, the topic is really exhausted itself. Many terms did not understand, but still thank you all! I'll be poking around on itself.

26.08.2009 18:50:00

I would be picked on by herself.
main thing is to remember that no one is happy, who have a lot, but one who lacks. Try to understand exactly what you are missing from your camera shots.
confirm that the essence of success is not so much a camera as a photographer. I believe that you used is not the full potential of a very good camera A620.
I once made a lot of very, in my opinion, a good color images color camera Olympus C-740 (3 MP). Soap or superzoom here for the current classification.
If desired look here:
http: // fotohost. ru / showgallery. php? galleryid = 4131 & amp; userid = 1591
And here already and SLR somewhere intervenes:
http: // fotohost. ru / showgallery. php? galleryid = 20199 & amp; userid = 1591

26.08.2009 20:35:00
quote:
:
[Viru $] thank you! Went to read.
Unfortunately, I can not climb long in finding photos. (And as much as possible to understand the true color photo captured or not ). . dear relationship. Apparently, the topic is really exhausted itself. Many terms did not understand, but still thank you all! I'll be poking around on itself.
as having experience in photography and prepress, I would like to say that your problem ("as the directory") without PhotoShop "and (or another program that you will use for color correction) is unsolvable
Change camera then you will not save the more that Canon A620 camera is very good, and reflex to change it is not much point. I shot Olympus C-760 and Pentax SLR and Canon, there is a difference, but not so significant to change the CD in the "mirror". Do not to mention the fact that the flowers, a macro for which the CD is more convenient. (By the way, close to 180 mm and 180 mm telezume macro lenses give different magnifications, so comparing them is not worth it).
Well, all in color rendering will lie in the same red-purple-green. RAW you will certainly help, but it is not a panacea. In a pinch, you can open jpeg in raw-converter and adjust the WB.
much more urgent to put WB when shooting. Do not believe AutoWB, especially when you have nothing in the frame for a guide (and at the macro-shooting, as a rule, and there is nothing but grass yes bees And check it is likely that your A620 allows you to balance on a white sheet (only do not expose it to the "white" sheet from the printer, because it is, in fact, too blue. Buy or pick up 15-25% gray without shades). In any case, put a "sunny" if the sun shines, and not Remember to make a double of the same frame on the "cloud" and "cloudy", then choose the best.
Well, if the requirements catastrophically serious, your budget is too small, because you need to buy (no, not the camera and special scales, which have photograph along with a flower; fixtures and reflectors that will simulate the light, a good tripod, it is desirable to special head for macro shooting, as well as a professional monitor, which have to be calibrated and on which you will achieve the right color on the scale. The joke, of course. I hope that you all not so serious, because all of the above I only need for very high-quality catalog, and for a glossy magazine will be enough of your camera, properly set manually WB and tone and color correction.
Unfortunately, without color correction you can not do, believe a man who spent a lot of time for the solution of the problem of correct color reproduction.
way, apologists for DSLRs - our professional photographer (a member of the Guild of advertising photographers), a few years removed for catalogs, and knows a lot about the art (in the sense of the cells) and shooting techniques; All "trifle" always shot in SLR, and Canon G-not-remember-what (long ago) and not in RAW, and in TIFF, considering that the correctness of the WB meaning in RAW is not. The scale of the frame was required! And then all the pictures went to a specialist for color correction (with the subject), who sat at a calibrated monitor, surrounded by light with a constant color temperature and gray walls.
He (color corrector) corrected all the scanned slides (that is brewing advice to use the film as obradayuschuyu large color gamut). Slides were scanned on a drum scanner, calibratable regularly to ensure the highest quality scans. Still, after that professional pored over files.
So go ahead. . . Learn. . . And all you get. . .

26.08.2009 21:11:00
Hoo! Now I am confused at the end. . . . So, it makes no sense to take the SLR? I have become their prigyadyvat. And the Canon is broken, so that on any new needs. But doing like this: BM13 writes
check is likely that your A620 allows you to balance on a white sheet (do not expose it to the "white" sheet from the printer, because it is, in fact, too blue. Buy or pick up 15 -25% gray without shades). In any case, put the "sunny" if the sun shines, and do not forget to take the same picture on the "cloud" and "cloudy", then select the best one.
. . . result was not. BM13, so that you advise? May not be wise and take the CD? What are the challenges you?

26.08.2009 21:25:00

way, close to 180 mm and 180 mm telezume macro lenses give different magnifications
When shooting with the same distance - no. Macro glass will give a greater increase only at the expense of what can focus at a distance closer. Min. focusing distance to an object from Sigma 180/3, Macro 5 - 46 cm. If removed, for example, from two meters, the fact that the macro that the macro is not the glass - the difference in scale is not. Makrik will provide an opportunity to come closer and it is due to this to get a larger scale.

Not to mention the fact that the flowers, a macro for which the CD is more convenient
There are compact, there is a mirror. . . And while the macro - a favorite genre. With the compact macro miserable if only because that gives the maximum scale tsifromylo with minimal risk factors. Which inevitably gives the geometric distortion and perspective, as well as an excessively large depth of field. Moderated by one of the local galleries - Photo tsvyatochkov with compacts seen enough. The first thing that strikes me personally - damned mylnichnaya barrel + wide-angle perspective distortion. Vneschny kind of flower did not Estesstvenno. Even in b / w. If you drive up the zoom, the geometry improves, but falls resolution appear aberration. No, it certainly can someone tsifromylom and more convenient. . . To each his own. Is it better for macro flowers CD? Your right. From personal experience, I am deeply convinced that better mirror. Much better. But much more expensive.


[Viru $] thank you! Went to read.
You have not answered my question on the previous page: Help me choose! Need a macro and color, # 26
 

26.08.2009 21:33:00
quote:
:
Hoo! Now I am confused at the end. . . . So, it makes no sense to take the SLR? I have become their prigyadyvat. And the Canon is broken, so that on any new needs. But doing like this: BM13 writes
check is likely that your A620 allows you to balance on a white sheet (do not expose it to the "white" sheet from the printer, because it is, in fact, too blue. Buy or pick up 15 -25% gray without shades). In any case, put the "sunny" if the sun shines, and do not forget to take the same picture on the "cloud" and "cloudy", then select the best one.
. . . result was not. BM13, so that you advise? May not be wise and take the CD? What are the challenges you?

Liliana, close to the SLR is not for everybody. I almost stopped purchasing DSLR to shoot macro Or pick up a good old Olympus LiveView, of course should help, but to make a couple of shots "on the go", as before, does not work. . . Not to mention the fact that the depth of field in the compact is more suitable for close-up, even at full aperture.
If the old camera is broken, a new look at the same (or even to the same b / y). When my not very strong love for the Canon A620-A630 it was very successful. If you have time (and money) wait for the recently announced Canon G11). It seems from the Canon "and was smart enough to go from the race for the quantity to quality, and decreased the number of megapixels to 10 already! Explicit progress.
SLR, that there would not say it's a different style of shooting and life (this is my opinion, nothing more) so it can both bring joy and seriously disappoint.

How many people, so many opinions. I do not believe that the macro with compact so bad, though if we take into account "the image from the camera", without treatment, it is probably you're right. Maybe I saved what I used Olympus, which has an interesting mode "Super", the main charm is the fact that the minimum focusing distance of 1 cm, and the focal (EGF), about 110 mm, which solves the problem of "barrels ".
Well, about the macro and macro-zooms, then the macro lens focal distance" real ", and zooms in with the function of the macro, with an increase in the maximum focal length decreases, and at 250 mm focal length (with a minimum focusing distance Tamron 18 250 ~ 45-50 cm) corresponds to an increase of about 150-180 mm lens with a fixed risk factors. However, often it helps (I do not have a macro lens, and the flowers I love to take pictures).
Pages: 1 2

Help me choose! I need a macro and color

info@www.about-digital-photo.com