Home Racing World

Not the greatest shots, but here is a quickie example.

This photo was taken with Ap setting of F8.0


This one taken with F2.7


As you can see, the bottom pic begins to get blurry as it moves away from the center focal point, whereas the top pic has better depth of field.

Like I said, not the greatest shots but hopefully it helps understand it. Dave K and JESIV have helped me a lot.

Nice pics for me too. The only setting I use are very simple :

"macro mode" ON (often symbolized by a tulip flower)
Flash always off (I use 2 daylight/cold lights)
Optical zoom maximized. I noticed (to take wargaming miniatures especially) that macro mode was more effective when the optical zoom is at its maximum, and then I move the camera as closed as needed. When I want to make macro pictures of scenery or bigger size (I'd say, bigger than 1 foot) I play with the optical zoom more than just moving the camera.

For other things, I let the camera decide. For me the most difficult color to take photo is red.

Using a smaller aperture will get you more depth of field, which in turn means that the shutter will have to be open longer to get the correct exposure. Since you are using a tripod and can control the lighting longer exposure times will not be a problem. The more you zoom in on your subject the shallower your depth of field will be. You will need to experiment a little to find the correct aperture. Your camera's default settings may not be the best for what you are doing. I shoot at the maximum picture size and quality, then use editing software to shrink the picture down to the desired size. I like pictures that really pop, I could change the camera's sharpness and contrast settings, but I leave those at the default values and tweak things with the photo editing program. I use Adobe Photoshop Elements, but the are free programs like Gimp that can do most of the same things. Free programs often also include extra trash that can bog down your computer, so watch out what you actually install.
You can also use editing software to change the lighting and color balance, but it is best to get the color balance right to start with. The joy of digital photography is that it does not cost anything to experiment. If you do use editing software save the edited pictures with new file names or you originals will be lost.

Oh photography... long discussion coming I think.

The more depth of field (which is photographer talk for "whats in focus") you have the better. The higher the "f" number the more you have in focus. The lower the number you have less in focus and some parts of a macro photo will look like less is sharp.
Usually you want to have lights at an angle to your subject to light it completely. So the photos you posted where the flash was on you get more light reflected on even the black areas of the front fenders and therefore you get a more complete view of the subject because you can see the contours of the fenders.
if you don't have flashes you can use continuous lights like bright flood lights to illuminate your subject. I have lights over my track i use to brighten it up that have reflectors on clamps that i bought at Lowes that are just CF bulbs (i think like 75watt equivalent) that have the reflectors around them so when I have done videos for Carrera there's more bright light directed at the track... this also works VERY well and cheaply for taking photos if you don't want to spend the money on flashes or strobes.
I have studio lights that I use that i bought cheaply (for strobes anyway) from B&H. That's the lighting i use for all my slot pix that I post where you see a white background on them. These are the lights I use,not sure if this is the exact kit i bought or not since it was about 6 years ago i got these:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/4 ... ftbox.html

But as i said you can use worklights on clamps with normal bulbs to do nearly the same thing. They get hot though which is a downside to using continuous lights for photography.
http://www.lowes.com/ProductDisplay?par ... &cId=PDIO1

Some more quick DoF thoughts:

1. I too use a fixed aperture and set it at the smallest opening (highest f number) I can get. I use a tripod and, because of the long exposures (often around 1/3 to 1/2 sec) the small aperture causes, I also use the self timer for shutter release. That way you do not get camera shake from manually pressing the shutter release.

2. Because your in-focus area extends in front of and behind your focus point, I use manual focus and, unless I want to emphasise something, I focus on something in the middle range of the subject. In this way I ensure that I get the most "bang for the limited depth of field buck".

3. A further step I take is to use max zoom (600mm on my Pana FZ200 bridge camera) and photograph from pretty far away (like 5 meters). Another aid for greater depth of field.

4. I bought some pretty inexpensive LED photography lights. They give decent color and also generate less heat. I have a LED light box and a couple of loose LED lights for fill purposes. I must say though that I do not often bother with the loose lights.

FWIW

A couple of minor points to add to some great advice from others:

1. Use the camera timer with the tripod. The action of depressing the take picture button can cause slight movements that become much more visible as you increase the f-stop number.
2. Try taking a shot in the dark with only your 3 lights turned on
3. Use a grey card - helps greatly with white balance (if your camera support the use of custom white balance)

You've got some very nice pictures there that will only get better.

Last thing I'll add is the need to try and take photos with variation of colours that create a sense of depth/difference. You've already done it in the photo below with the left panel which has some variations of light bouncing off the panels creating a sense of depth and interest.



Compare this to the close up shot which has some variation but is affected by the light source:

Nothing to add. I think the covered it all unless you want to get deep enough to focus stack.

The more you play around with the above solutions the more you will learn. I'd even go so far as to try each idea on their own so you can gauge the exact effect on your shots. Once you learn what each does or looks like then you know which tricks to use to achieve your desired results.

Adjust one thing at a time to see what works and what doesn't. Try different ISO settings. Try different angles. Try moving your camera closer or farther away. Try moving your lights further away. Take lots of pictures.

If you crank up the ISO setting you are likely to get more noise. Higher ISO settings are useful if you are shooting in low light without a tripod. If you can find a test report on your camera in a photography magazine it will tell you where noise will start to be a problem.

So I assume that those of us now using Smart Phones, should just "move along" ?

Don't get me started. The General gave me one of those new smartypants phones. I knew her tablet and phone took good photos...but had no idea.

Until I took some shots with mine and started messing with them.



This is without any adjusting in Photoshop.

Sure glad I spent 6 months worth of slot car allowance on that new fangled camera! Yes sir, had to have it to take better pictures right?

Uh huh.

But in the end...they say it is 99% operator and 1% equipment. If this is true...I will never take a better photo.

OK! I thought I'd just gotten lucky with mine!

Nice shots Jeremy.