Best picture formula

[woodshopdemos]

I haven't done anything to the picture before going to the resizing site.  Maybe I should make adjustments first with some photo editing software and then resize?

John,

Your right on that issue.  When I got my camera, it was a deal at 275.00 if I remember right.  At 2 megapixels it was probably outdated in a few months.  Do you think it's that important to upgrade to a much higher megapixel camera as well?  Or is a 2 megapixel camera enough for pictures on the forum?

It isnice rt o have a picture taken at 1200 or greater...in retouching the pixels are amall enough so that you canmake smooth work. I work in Photo by Carell and when done, copy it to SmoothScaling -- I have uswed that program for years and it is the only one that is on 3.5" discs. The company no longer makes it...they have gone into games. But in SmoothScaling I make the width 350 pixels and copy that onto my website,,,coudn't be easier. KISS in real time.
  By the way, if your camera has a white balance feature use it. I think your use of shop lighting is giving you a strong  yellew overcast.

 

[johnbro]

Ah, I understand the problem now. Thank for clarifying.

As said, the "good better best" levels vary from camera to camera. If I know I'm shooting for a web upload, I use the smallest file size. That varies between my point & shoot and my SLR, but either way I upload the pics I like to an album on photobucket (www.photobucket.com) and let it resize the pic to 640 x 480, then link to that picture in my post. I don't want to have to load the pics into PS or a similar tool and resize, although PS will do a batch resize pretty quickly and easily (I used that functionality commonly when our company does websites for client to make both a thumbnail and a fixed sized larger version of the same image).

WRT color or white balance, some newer cameras have pretty good auto white balance features, some don't. It can be tricky to fix it after the picture is taken, so if your camera has a custom WB feature it might be worthwhile to go through the process of setting it for your CFLs in the shop. My SLR has one, my P&S does not.

 

[wnagle]

I'm not sure if the white balance has a custom setting or not, i'll have to check.  The preset settings don't seem to get it right.  Florescent is too warm and incandescent is too cool.  So if there is no way to customize the white balance, I'll use the flash rather than adjust color after the fact.

 

[woodshopdemos]

I'm not sure if the white balance has a custom setting or not, i'll have to check.  The preset settings don't seem to get it right.  Florescent is too warm and incandescent is too cool.  So if there is no way to customize the white balance, I'll use the flash rather than adjust color after the fact.

I think it is the other way around... flourescents are usually colder (blue) and incandescents are warmer. (Daylight is 6400 kelvin; incandescents in  3200 range. Flourescents can be "cool white" and closer to daylight but lack the 3200 range.)

When you use flash, that is always 6400 or so and easier to mix with the flourescents. Any incandescent will be very warm in the picture. If you are shooting 6 ft and closer and using flash, leave the camera at their WB setting.

 

[wnagle]

John,

You are correct, I should have used more complete sentences...Here's what I meant.  When I use the CFL's as the light scource and the camera is set to florescent the pictures turn out to warm.  When I use CFL's and the camera setting is on incandescent, the pictures come out too cool.  I'm not sure what temperature the CFL's are, but I suspect they are warmer than most florescent lights and cooler than most incandescent bulbs.  I could probably check the packaging but without the correct filter setting in the camera to balance the light output of the CFL's, I guess its a moot point.  And I suppose CFL's come in a variety of temperatures as well.  I have some that are bright white and most in my shop are warm white. 

When I worked with 35mm you could screw on the appropriate filter or filters to your lens.

 

[b_m_hart]

Brice,
I've  been trying to use the ambient light in the shop to avoid the shadows of my flash.  And this is where I've been going to resize.  http://www.shrinkpictures.com/

I haven't done anything to the picture before going to the resizing site.  Maybe I should make adjustments first with some photo editing software and then resize?

John,

Your right on that issue.  When I got my camera, it was a deal at 275.00 if I remember right.  At 2 megapixels it was probably outdated in a few months.  Do you think it's that important to upgrade to a much higher megapixel camera as well?  Or is a 2 megapixel camera enough for pictures on the forum?

The quality of the lense is VASTLY more important than the megapixel count these days.  For example, wife and I bought a camera (http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=139&modelid=14256) as a joint birthday present last year.  It's a great camera, with a TON of megapixels, and features. 

Now, we have a dog that is almost all black (she's my avatar pic), and we have nearly black tile in our kitchen.  In low light, taking a picture of her on the tile was effectively pointless.  I bought her a couple of "cheap" lenses for her birthday this year, and the difference in picture quality and clarity is astounding.  So much so that she took the "black dog on black tile" test pic, and upon reviewing told me that the floor was dirty, I needed to sweep it - along the lines of "see the sand grains in the picture?"...

 

[woodshopdemos]

Brice,
I've  been trying to use the ambient light in the shop to avoid the shadows of my flash.  And this is where I've been going to resize.  http://www.shrinkpictures.com/

I haven't done anything to the picture before going to the resizing site.  Maybe I should make adjustments first with some photo editing software and then resize?

John,

Your right on that issue.  When I got my camera, it was a deal at 275.00 if I remember right.  At 2 megapixels it was probably outdated in a few months.  Do you think it's that important to upgrade to a much higher megapixel camera as well?  Or is a 2 megapixel camera enough for pictures on the forum?

Wayne, there is excellent advice up above. I use  the 1028 by and that is way more than I need. I want to end up with a width of 350 pixels. I really like the large format so that I can retouch frames easier and better. I use Corel Paint - I didn't think that is as popular programs as others mentioned. I started with it in '78 and just keep upgrading it. I use "smoothscaling" to reduce whatever picture I end up with to the 350 width -- it is a great program but discontinued a couple of years back. Thankfully I have had need for support. 3.5 master and I hold on to it dearly. Advise --    once you get a system that works for you, remove all other programs from PC and dint look for new...just concentrate with what you have.

 

[wnagle]

Thanks John,

I haven't posted any ne wpics for a while so now I have to remember how I did it when it worked.  I think if I do a few it will comeback to me.  And so far I haven't been doing any alterations to the pics other than size to fit the forum.  I need to learn the best way to add pointer and circles and such on the photo to point out a specific area that is being discussed or pointed out.  I have whatever comes with windows xp pro and I have adobe photo shop that I could install if needed too.

 

[TheToolPlace]

One of the features that I like about Photoshop elements is it's feature to remove an overall color cast in a picture.  It is interesting how different cameras impose a yellow or blue coloration.  It also has a function called publish to the web that allows you to reduce quality, size, etc to shrink the size of files while previewing the results.

Peter

Another very handy feature of Photoshop is the ability to Batch Process images.  Basically you "record" an action as you do it to one image, and then you can apply all of the same settings (resizing, auto-colour, cropping and more) to as many images as you like.  It's a very handy feature.

I normally shoot in the highest non .tiff format on my Camera and then Batch all of my images to perform colour correction and resize them for the web.

 

[Dave Ronyak]

Thanks for everyones help,

Alex the *'s stand for good better and best quality and the highest is TIFF Quality... that is a setting separate and aside from the pixels settings.  So I guess I'm not sure which quality setting to pick and which pixel setting to get the best picture when reduced.  I had Irfanview and deleted it cause I couldn't figure it out.

Brice, I was thinking along those lines. I'm inclined to use the highest pixels and highest quality setting and then reduce in size to be under 125kb.  Maybe I should get an inexpensive tripod...I'm sure that would help and be better than the stick (mono pod) I use.

Tom, I think your a couple steps ahead of me... I need to know the best camera setting to take the picture first...then onto the reduction settings... then on to batch reduction... I think

Wayne,

When we next visit, I can show you how to do a few basic things using IrfanView.  Bring you PC!!

Dave R.

 

[geliyooo]

Thanks brice 

 

[wnagle]

I just noticed this old post.  I have since upgraded my shop lighting to full spectrum daylight balanced bulbs at 5500 degree kelvin.  I also doubled the amount of bulbs and also upgraded all of my task lights with the same.  Basically I have 6 sockets with 4 bulbs each in a 24 foot by 24 foot shop.  (9 foot high ceiling) Cost is about $300.00 total for the 6 sockets and 24 bulbs.  This is a lot of light and simple lighting solution.  The lights are pleasant to work under with no flicker and no hum,just pure daylight!  And now when I take pictures I don't need a flash and all the colors look good on the daylight setting.  I still need a new camera I'm sure.  Here are some links to the lighting I have if anyone is interested. 

I have 4 bulb sockets in each ceiling socket with 4 170 equivalent daylight balanced CFL's.  And the same bulbs with a reflector in all of my tool task lights.  Ya need more light the older you get!

4 Head Studio Light Socket Splitter Adapter for E27 Bulb. 
http://www.amazon.com/Studio-Light-Socket-Splitter-Adapter/dp/B0051EFJAG/ref=pd_sbs_p_5

ALZO daylight balanced bulbs draw 45 watts and are 170 watt equivalents.
http://www.alzodigital.com/online_store/light_bulbs_compact_fluorescent-daylight.htm

Reflector's with the same 5500 degree 170 watt equivalent bulbs.  (the switched sockets work well also)
http://www.alzodigital.com/online_store/cfl-reflector-light-bulb.htm

 

[joraft]

Ya need more light the older you get!

You got that right, Wayne!

That's why I just had to pick up one of these  [big grin]:

 

[wnagle]

John,

That looks like a pretty nice task light...probably only need one on each side of the band saw blade!    ;D