Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

hey mat i dont know if you take criticism from a teenager but i got some suggestions...the setting being a sunset, the car should be quite a bit darker....and to make it look that little bit more realistic you should cut the stuff you see from the old background in the windows out and then darken the new parts behind the windows to make it look real..

Must admit I wasn't sure I agreed when I read this but I think you were right

  • Replies 175
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

The best analogy I've heard (or read) regarding the relationship between Aperture and Shutter Speed was in relation to a water tap - the wider you open the tap (i.e. the lower the Aperture value and hence wider the opening), the less time you have to have that tap open (i.e. the faster the shutter speed you can use) to let the water flow (i.e. let light into the lens and onto the sensor or film)...

That's a good analogy.

I like to look at the lenses themselves, for instance the 50mm range of lenses starting from 1.2 to 1.8. You'll notice that the 1.2 lens has a much wider lenses than the 1.8, that's your first clue on aperture size. Using these prime lenses as an example

- the lower the number the bigger the lens size, the more light it lets in, is faster

- the higher the number the smaller the lens size is, the less light it lets in, is slower

So the 1.2 aperture is much better than the 1.8 because the lenses are much bigger, lets in more light and is faster in taking the same picture as the 1.8 lens with the exact same lighting. Another indicator of the 1.2 being a better lens is the price, it is much much more expensive than the 1.8!

You'll want a lower aperture setting for action shot or low light environment such as indoors especially if you are hand holding your camera. Cameras have more trouble "grasping" dark environments and will take longer to process when you take a picture with a higher aperture setting, that's why if you move while the camera is still taking the photo the image will appear blurry! That is also why we have to use tripods!

Another way to compensate for lenses with a higher aperture is to use flash. Flashes will allow cameras to take photos of subjects as if they are appearing in nice bright daylight environments. Of course, you don't (and can't) always use a flash for photography (ie. museums, badminton matches etc), which is why it is better to use fast lenses with lower aperture settings.

A lower aperture setting will also give you an increased "bokeh" effect, meaning that when you take a picture of a dog or an insect, you can get part of your subject in focus (foreground) and the rest out of focus (background). A higher aperture settings will not let you do this, but it will get everything in the image frame in focus.

What photographers want => lenses that allow as much light in as possible, this increase gives them better control on lighting because it is easier and faster to control a lighter environment than a dark one. That's what Aperture is all about, the AMOUNT of light.

Shutter speed is the capturing speed when taking a picture. This one is about capturing your subject "in time".

Are you shooting fast moving subjects? sports? increase the shutter speed. A good example is the traffic speed camera LOL

Are you shooting something that flows or moves slowly and you want to put that to effect in your photos? decrease the shutter speed. A good example is a star trail, northern lights or waterfalls (provided that you are using filters to let in less light).

Shutter speed affects lighting as well, the quicker the shutter the less light it will allow, the slower the shutter the more light it will allow => that's what shutter speed is all about, the TIME for light.

For the traffic speed camera to take a quick photo of your number plates, it has to make sure that there is plenty of light to see your plates and capture it quickly using a high shutter speed. To ensure that there is enough light it needs in the little time that is has, it needs a lower aperture setting. This will be good enough during daylight but if the weather is poor or dark it won't be enough, it needs a flash, and a really big one too.

Capturing a waterfall in the daytime with a slower shutter speed will increase the light. Which means that the image will appear too bright even if you set the aperture higher. In this case you will need to resort to filters that act like "sunglasses" to make the environment look darker while giving the camera more time to add more light while it takes it waits for the shutter to elapse.

Slightly longer analogy but yeah, its layman!

Great shot dan. strong composition. only thing I could possibly to suggest would be to add a gradient to the sky, similar to what a CPL would give it. Not that it needs but, but if you wanted something to try :D nice work nigga.

Great shot dan. strong composition. only thing I could possibly to suggest would be to add a gradient to the sky, similar to what a CPL would give it. Not that it needs but, but if you wanted something to try :) nice work nigga.

Can you do it for me? I just ran I through lightroom?

Here's an oddball car for you all - I've heard of Ramblers before because a school friend's parents owned a MASSIVE land-yacht of a wagon called a Rambler Matador, but I have no idea what model this particular car is:

IMG_7875v2.jpg

This weeks project 365 ;)

Also, if anyone can be bothered please go to this link CLICK HERE and vote for my North Narrabeen Sunset shot called "The Path to Freedom". Its about half way down. Much appreciated!!

Photos from the trackday will be posted on wednesday/thursday after PI has sorted through what they want.

Read the blog post to see my newest addition to my photography addiction!

CLICK HERE!

July%2012th,%202010.jpg

July%2013th,%202010.jpg

July%2014th,%202010.jpg

July%2015th,%202010.jpg

July%2016th,%202010.jpg

July%2017th,%202010.jpg

July%2018th,%202010.jpg

Morning gents!

PI = performance imports yeah? (VOTED)

There was a car show yesterday just down the road. Went and checked it out. here's a few pics. CC me if you have any thoughts. I've tried to move away from usual oversaturated style to see how they turn out.

DSC_1443.jpg

DSC_1445.jpg

DSC_1487.jpg

DSC_1491.jpg

DSC_1488.jpg

DSC_1498.jpg

DSC_1575.jpg

[Group%206]-DSC_1507_DSC_1533-27%20images.jpg

Bonus pic!

DSC_1479y77.jpg

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Very decent bit of kit. Definitely black it out I reckon.  
    • Because people who want that are buying euros. The people with the money to buy the aftermarket heads and blocks aren’t interested in efficiency or making -7 power, they’re making well over 1,000hp and pretty much only drive them at full throttle  best way to way make money is know your customer base and what they want and don’t spend money making things they don’t want. 
    • It's not, but it does feel like a bit of a missed opportunity regardless. For example, what if the cylinder head was redesigned to fit a GDI fuel system? It's worth like two full points of compression ratio when looking at modern GDI turbo vs PFI turbo. I'm pretty reliably surprised at how much less turbo it takes to make similar power out of a modern engine vs something like an RB26. Something with roughly the same dimensions as a -7 on an S55 is making absolutely silly power numbers compared to an RB26. I know there's a ton of power loss from things like high tension rings, high viscosity oil, clutch fan, AWD standby loss, etc but it's something like 700 whp in an F80 M3 vs 400 whp in an R33 GTR. The stock TF035HL4W turbos in an F80 M3 are really rather dinky little things and that's enough to get 400 whp at 18 psi. This just seems unwise no? I thought the general approach is if you aren't knock limited the MFB50 should be held constant through the RPM range. So more timing with RPM, but less timing with more cylinder filling. A VE-based table should accordingly inverse the VE curve of the engine.
    • I've seen tunes from big name workshops with cars making in excess of 700kW and one thing that stood out to me, is that noone is bothering with torque management. Everyone is throwing in as much timing as the motor can take for a pull. Sure that yields pretty numbers on a dyno, but it's not keeping these motors together for more than a few squirts down the straight without blowing coolant or head gaskets. If tuners, paid a bit more attention and took timing out in the mid range, managed boost a bit better, you'll probably see less motors grenading. Not to name names, or anything like that, but I've seen a tune, from a pretty wild GT-R from a big name tuner and I was but perplexed on the amount of timing jammed into it. You would have expected a quite a bit less timing at peak torque versus near the limiter, but there was literally 3 degrees of difference. Sure you want to make as much as possible throughout the RPM range, but why? At the expense of blowing motors? Anyhow I think we've gone off topic enough once again lol.
    • Because that’s not what any of them are building these heads or blocks for. It’s to hold over over 1000hp at the wheels without breaking and none of that stuff is required to make power 
×
×
  • Create New...