Photo tips

[colterphoto1]

Hi fellas, seems that with the new forum and digital cameras, it's easier than ever for us to post photos of our gear. Here are some helpful hints that should make for better quality photos for everyone. We're rightfully proud of our Klipsch purchases and sharing that pride of ownership is natural. These tips are meant to help you make your images look as cool as possible.

Clean up. Your gear will always display better if the room is picked up (no plastic toys), wires tucked away, and everything dusted (Heritage recently oiled).

The most common problem is UNDERexposure. This is usually caused by inadequate flash, being too distant from the subject, or other light sources. Open windows and bright interior lights 'trick' your camera into thinking there is more light available, thus the flash shuts off too soon. Solution is to either eliminate these sources from the frame, or reduce their output by closing drapes and using dimmer bulbs in fixtures.

If you are interested in showing the ambience of your room, whether it be sconce lighting or the TV screen, a tripod is a must. Put your camera on manual and adjust the shutter speed to about 1/15 of a second as a starting point. This will allow the ambient light to record on the film/chip. Flash and aperature should match and that will correctly illuminate the rest of the photo.

If you have access to Photoshop, many images can be tweaked by using the Image/Adjust/Levels function. To save an underexposed image, pull the gray middle slider to the left until it is under the curve representing the exposure of the picture (it will look like a mountain, you're aiming for the foothills to the right). Then SaveAs..., I usually give the new image the same name with LT for 'light' after the main file name.

Hope this helps. Don't mean to criticize, just trying to help everyone improve in this area.

Michael

[Petrol]

Hi fellas, seems that with the new forum and digital cameras, it's easier than ever for us to post photos of our gear. . . .Hope this helps. Don't mean to criticize, just trying to help everyone improve in this area.

Michael

Thanks for the great tips!

Now all I have to do is actually learn how to post PICs here

{Edit: I guess I'll also need to learn to resize them as well...I seem to remember a post mentioning that has to be done when posting}

[colterphoto1]

When you REPLY, look at bottom of the screen- see FILE ATTACHMENT, that's it. Just BROWSE your computer for the image you want posted (one per post) open it and POST. That's it.

I usually resize mine to 640 or less pixals wide so it doesn't hang up the dial-up people. Looks like the Forum software does a further resize anyway.

Michael

[Petrol]

Thanks in Advance!!

Here's my first attempt...

[Petrol]

YAHOO!!

Thanks Buddy

[Petrol]

ah, it appears that for faster loading of the page, I need to learn how to do that "re-sizing" thing and use it prior to posting the PICs . . .

[customsteve01]

If you use Windows and have paint it is very easy to resize there.

When in Paint, click on Image, Click Strech and Skew, replace the 100% horizonal with somewhere around 35%, replace 100% Vertical with the same number, and click OK. If you don't like the size just click edit and undue and it will go back to 100% and you can start the steps above over. When your happy with the size, save it.

To save, click File and Save as. You should rename or just add "sm" to the end of your origanal title. Then use the smaller picture to insert in the thread.

If you ckick on edit on your post you can delete the picture and readd the new smaller one.

Steve

[sunburnwilly]

I need to learn how to resize as well. Is there a way to delete my last post so that it dosen't take so long to load the page?

Cick edit and delete attachment .

[RichardP]

YES, please resize! As someone who must contend with dial-up (at around 40 kbs), because I have no alternative[],

I respectfully request that you please resize your 4, 5, or 6 megapixel

pictures to something around 150 kb or less. There are likely

more of us poor dial-up dinosaurs that you might think. I

simply cannot open some threads sometimes because of embedded pictures,

which would take several minutes to download them all and eventually

display the thread and replies. Thanks for your cooperation.[]

[neo33]

"The most common problem is UNDERexposure. This is usually caused by

inadequate flash, being too distant from the subject, or other light

sources. Open windows and bright interior lights 'trick' your camera

into thinking there is more light available, thus the flash shuts off

too soon. Solution is to either eliminate these sources from the frame,

or reduce their output by closing drapes and using dimmer bulbs in

fixtures."

True. However, sometimes I want the picture to come out exactly

the way it looks (with the naked eyes) in the room with the available

light, UNDEREXPOSED as you put it. So when the photo looks

underexposed, it does not necessarily mean that the photo is

underexposed. It could be the intention of the photographer to

capture the photo under the EXACT lighting condition in the room at the time the

photo was taken. I don't much appreciate when you photoshoped

some of my photos when my intention is to have these photos show the

exact lighting condition in the room (as seen by my naked eyes) when

these photos were captured.

[Cal Blacksmith]

Bigrol21; I am not quite sure what you mean by more

defined You depth of field is good and the focus is good, the exposure is a

little over exposed possibly by a stop or so. Not every photograph needs to be

shot at the full resolution of your camera. Depending on what you intend to do

with the photographs, shooting at max resolution is not necessary unless you

intend to make a poster out of it!

For use as snap shots (a term pros hate!) if you shot at 1

½ or 2mpxl you will be just fine for 4 x 6 prints. For 8 x 10 (12) prints 4mpxl

is just fine. For posters on up, 6mpxl will do the job. For the Internet, you

need less than ½mpxl.

To have prints made, check out the equipment that will be

printing. For most printing, 300 dpi is about right. This will give you photo

quality prints. It is best to size the photos to the size you are going to

print. For example if you want to print 4 x 6 prints resize the image to that

size at 300 dpi FIRST BEFORE YOU PRINT THEM to keep control of image quality,

size and cropping.

For Internet use, 72dpi is normal, size your image to

anything between 4 x 6 and 8 x 10 at 72dpi and you will reap the thanks of

those of us who are on dialup!

This image was sized to 7.5 x 10 at 72dpi before uploading.

Notice it is of adequate size to be nicely seen and it is only a raw 1.1 Meg files down from 17.4 at full

size. After saving as a high quality JPEG, the image size was further reduced

to only 131kb, a file size that loads nearly instantly even with dial up.

It started out as a 17.4 Meg file that was 39.5 x 29.6

inches in size at 72 dpi. (video screen resolution.) It is 9.5 x 7 at 300 dpi

without resampeling the image. So you can see that the DPI you are using will

have a big effect on the size of the displayed image. The same amount of

information was used on BOTH images 17.4 megs but how tightly you pack them

together makes a difference on the size of the displayed image.

It is better for you to choose how and what gets

edited instead of the printer so you

wont be disappointed in the results. ALL OVERSIZE images will be edited to fit the print making machine, it is

better that you decide what the final result will be.

[colterphoto1]

PEOPLE,

I appreciate your entheusiasm, but if you have an oversized image on this thread, kindly delete it or I will ask that the thread be deleted.

Images should be properly sized (640 pixals across) and detailed (72 dpi) for a file size less than 200 kb to be uploaded on screen in a reasonable time frame.

Please stop posting images until you can perform this operation to your photos.

Michael

[bigrol21]

Thank you guys for the suggestions. This is a test. Sorry for the last pic I posted I know how aggrivating it can be.

[nicholtl]

Wayne, is that a vintage SS Camaro I see in that pic? Is it yours??

[Olorin]

True. However, sometimes I want the picture to come out exactly

the way it looks (with the naked eyes) in the room with the available

light, UNDEREXPOSED as you put it. So when the photo looks

underexposed, it does not necessarily mean that the photo is

underexposed. It could be the intention of the photographer to

capture the photo under the EXACT lighting condition in the room at the time the

photo was taken. I don't much appreciate when you photoshoped

some of my photos when my intention is to have these photos show the

exact lighting condition in the room (as seen my by my naked eyes) when

these photos were captured.

It's a good thing all our monitors are calibrated and set to the same

color temperature and gamma, and that we all have the same ambient

lighting conditions, and that all of us, regardless of age, gender, or

eye color, perceive color the same way so we can see the exact lighting

condition in the room (as seen by your naked eyes) when

those photos were captured.

[LarryC]

Wayne, is that a vintage SS Camaro I see in that pic? Is it yours??

Forget the Camaro -- how about that chopped '49 or '50 Mercury!!! Beautiful car even today (I like the '50 better) and a classic for decades.

[neo33]

"It's a good thing all our monitors are calibrated and set to the same

color temperature and gamma, and that we all have the same ambient

lighting conditions, and that all of us, regardless of age, gender, or

eye color, perceive color the same way so we can see the exact lighting

condition in the room (as seen by your naked eyes) when

those photos were captured.

"

Very interesting observation, Olorin! Maybe I can do a PhD. Thesis on this. Thanks for the idea.

[arfz28]

TEST.

[colterphoto1]

ANother little lighting tip. If the flash is on camera, it will reflect directly off a shiny metal object (like front of a amp) and fool the sensor again, or leave a very bright spot on your photo. Photograph shiny flat objects at a slight angle to reduce the glare. Alternately, move the flash off camera, or angle the flash and reflect it off of a nearby flat white object (piece of card stock or white wall). The INDIRECT flash will help give a sense of dimension to the object while reducing and direct reflections. This might be particularly useful when trying to show blemishes in speaker cabinets or grain pattern/color in wood.

Michael

[colterphoto1]

Moderator, please delete this entire thread. I'm tired of trying to help people here with my professional advice only to be constantly baited by the same individual.

Or just delete my user id.

Thank you,

Michael