Rate the Photo Above you

[sub68]

8 minutes ago, Radium_Angel said:

It is clear I have much to learn about toy photography, it was a nice day and I wanted to do something a little more humorous, so, a boy and his dog, out for a walk

If anyone has experience in this sort of thing, I am all ears!

Nikon D3x, f/11 1/15th sec, ISO 100, 70mm (from a 28-70 f/2.8 lens)

That looks great, I love the idea.

 

Here is a bunny I had to crop in also I am rusty on my lightroom skills.

I notice that I needed higher ISO but I didn't notice in shooting.

Panasonic GX85 ISO 800 (lens a 45-150mm) 150mm f/9 1/40 sec

 

[Radium_Angel]

18 minutes ago, sub68 said:

ISO 800

That is the wonderful thing about modern SLRs, they can reach crazy high ISOs without a loss in clarity.

The bunny is cute, but I thought there was a butterfly on his back, before I realized it was a leaf.

19 minutes ago, sub68 said:

I love the idea.

Thank you, I'm looking at an Instagram site called Articulated Comic Book Art, and I'm blown away by the skills on display there

https://www.instagram.com/articulatedcomicbookart/?igshid=1oljmi9xifaam

 

[sub68]

2 minutes ago, Radium_Angel said:

That is the wonderful thing about modern SLRs, they can reach crazy high ISOs without a loss in clarity.

good to know coming from a 15 year old DSLR.

2 minutes ago, Radium_Angel said:

The bunny is cute, but I thought there was a butterfly on his back, before I realized it was a leaf.

Well I couldnt move that...

3 minutes ago, Radium_Angel said:

Thank you, I'm looking at an Instagram site called Articulated Comic Book Art, and I'm blown away by the skills on display there

I love those

[Radium_Angel]

1 minute ago, sub68 said:

Well I couldnt move that...

That is a huge problem when dealing with live animals. Photoshop to the rescue!

I took this pic (same day, different area, and realized only afterwards (when I got home) there was a blade of grass right in the way next to the rock, that was quite distracting. 

I know very little about PS (I much prefer to get things right in the camera/lighting, than play with the image in Post) but the clone stamp tool I do know, so...out it went.

[sub68]

3 minutes ago, Radium_Angel said:

That is a huge problem when dealing with live animals. Photoshop to the rescue!

I took this pic (same day, different area, and realized only afterwards (when I got home) there was a blade of grass right in the way next to the rock, that was quite distracting. 

I know very little about PS (I much prefer to get things right in the camera/lighting, than play with the image in Post) but the clone stamp tool I do know, so...out it went.

I don't have PS.....

[GDRRiley]

2 hours ago, Radium_Angel said:

That is the wonderful thing about modern SLRs, they can reach crazy high ISOs without a loss in clarity.

Yep and I’d say 800 is a pretty normal iso for me to be on. 
I’d say the limit is 1600 or 3200 on most of canons recent crops. While FF you can push 6400. 
unless it’s an A7S in which case just keep going 

3 hours ago, Radium_Angel said:

The sky reminds me of the vacation I took in Colorado some years back, that delightful pure blue that aches to look at. Safe to assume this was modified in Post

this was California in Tahoe national forest. Yep. 

[GDRRiley]

2 hours ago, sub68 said:

I don't have PS.....

That’s okay. Most people are moving on from it 

I only ever color grade, noise reduction and crop in addition to adding water marks. 
I’ve never been one to heavily edit by removing or adding things 

[The Blackhat]

Yikes, I can’t stand anything past ISO 320 on my R. Past that the noise becomes basic unusable. I try to shoot 100-200 at all times unless I’m inside with my strobe, then I shoot 50.

[GDRRiley]

2 hours ago, The Blackhat said:

Yikes, I can’t stand anything past ISO 320 on my R. Past that the noise becomes basic unusable. I try to shoot 100-200 at all times unless I’m inside with my strobe, then I shoot 50.

on an EOS R? that should  fine at 3200 and like 6400 decent

its okay to push it higher than 400

 

[The Blackhat]

2 hours ago, GDRRiley said:

on an EOS R? that should  fine at 3200 and like 6400 decent

its okay to push it higher than 400

 

I think we have different definitions of what bad noise is. No point in me getting super sharp, expensive lenses if I’m just gonna shoot 1600 and wash it all away. For the things I shoot, anything above 200-400 at the top end gets detail washed away into grain. 

 

[Radium_Angel]

Advice to those who are curious:

I've been enlisting a friend who vapes for my toy figure photography. I figured this would be temporary, until I could get my hands on some dry ice.

Well I did, and the dry ice didn't work very well at all.

The vape is oil based, so it flows better and is thicker. The dry ice is not, so it's very wispy and dissipates quickly.

 

I looked into a fog machine, but they are designed for rooms, and even the cheap ones are complete overkill. A Hazer is a neat idea, but the pricetag excluded that as well, and a water-based humidifier won't give the same result as a vape.

 

Fortunately, the vape fluids can be had in zero nicotine. The drawback is it needs someone who vapes to operate it, as near as I can determine, I can't buy a vape and fluid, and just turn it "on" to continuously emit fog.

 

[sub68]

@Radium_Angel for vapors dry ice might be good.

how about a cheapo fire extinguisher

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B002U0KGDY/

Like this?

EDIT: I remember this (took me way to long to find) from a potato jet video.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1328500-REG/atmosphere_1can_aerosol_haze_spray_for.html

[Radium_Angel]

4 hours ago, sub68 said:

for vapors dry ice might be good.

For very wispy perhaps, but as I mentioned, the dry ice didn't do well at all, is evaporated far far too quickly for my purpose.

The Aerosol haze is pretty slick, I've seen videos on it, and one day I may have to give that a swing (I'm in the planning stages of a Louisiana bayou werewolf diorama where this may work well.

4 hours ago, sub68 said:

a cheapo fire extinguisher

That's thinking outside the box, I like it! Brilliant idea...

[Zodiark1593]

On 6/19/2021 at 8:06 PM, GDRRiley said:

Yep and I’d say 800 is a pretty normal iso for me to be on. 
I’d say the limit is 1600 or 3200 on most of canons recent crops. While FF you can push 6400. 
unless it’s an A7S in which case just keep going 

this was California in Tahoe national forest. Yep. 

On my A7C (the little sister to the A7iii), I can get surprisingly usable results at 12800 ISO. 
 

Kind of a fan of grainy films myself, so having such latitude is pretty liberating. I actually prefer my out of focus areas to have some grain. I found that I don’t like perfect smooth bokeh. 
 

On 6/21/2021 at 6:34 AM, Radium_Angel said:

Advice to those who are curious:

I've been enlisting a friend who vapes for my toy figure photography. I figured this would be temporary, until I could get my hands on some dry ice.

Well I did, and the dry ice didn't work very well at all.

The vape is oil based, so it flows better and is thicker. The dry ice is not, so it's very wispy and dissipates quickly.

 

I looked into a fog machine, but they are designed for rooms, and even the cheap ones are complete overkill. A Hazer is a neat idea, but the pricetag excluded that as well, and a water-based humidifier won't give the same result as a vape.

 

Fortunately, the vape fluids can be had in zero nicotine. The drawback is it needs someone who vapes to operate it, as near as I can determine, I can't buy a vape and fluid, and just turn it "on" to continuously emit fog.

 

Learned this from my time as volunteer Stagehand (back before the Pandemic). The temperature of the surface the fog will travel has a pretty substantial impact on how the fog flows, and how rapidly it disperses. Larger, professional stadiums will sometimes fit cooled floors specifically to keep the fog low to the ground. 
 

It stands to reason that Carbon Dioxide will behave similar. With a chilled surface, the gas will absorb less heat, and “flow” better. 

[Zodiark1593]

Does it count if I made it into a wallpaper?

[Radium_Angel]

5 hours ago, Zodiark1593 said:

Learned this from my time as volunteer Stagehand (back before the Pandemic). The temperature of the surface the fog will travel has a pretty substantial impact on how the fog flows, and how rapidly it disperses. Larger, professional stadiums will sometimes fit cooled floors specifically to keep the fog low to the ground. 
 

It stands to reason that Carbon Dioxide will behave similar. With a chilled surface, the gas will absorb less heat, and “flow” better. 

Thank you, this will be quite useful if I give dry ice another swing.

5 hours ago, Zodiark1593 said:

Does it count if I made it into a wallpaper?

It's stunning, *very* well done! A solid grasp on DoF and when to use it to maximum effect.

5 hours ago, Zodiark1593 said:

Kind of a fan of grainy films myself, so having such latitude is pretty liberating

Many years ago, I played with some expired film, this, for example, was from some ISO 100 film (no Post work, straight from the Nikon F3H)

You can see how the film emulsion had broken down entirely, giving it the effect of super high ISO grainy look. Sometimes working with expired film gave you such interesting effects, most of the time the film was simply too far gone to yield anything useful

[Zodiark1593]

On 6/23/2021 at 2:54 AM, Radium_Angel said:

Thank you, this will be quite useful if I give dry ice another swing.

It's stunning, *very* well done! A solid grasp on DoF and when to use it to maximum effect.

 

Certainly didn’t think that any photos I shot, especially something quite literally random, would be described as “Stunning”.

[Radium_Angel]

Ok, this picture barely qualifies as photography, it's mostly showing off my newest figure, Lucidique

 

As I am rapidly discovering, McFarlane figures are very well sculptured, and are little more than a statue. Her left arm, for example, does not move at the elbow, so it's permanently either on her breast, or in her face. Given this limitation, I've decided to make her a rampaging alcoholic, so will always be photographed with a drink (or a bottle) in her hand.

 

Pinhead, which I have shown you earlier, is fully posable, but the other three original Cenobites (Chatterer, Butterball and Female (she never had an official name)), are also barely more than statues, and are stupidly expensive. Lucidique is part of "Clive Barker's Tortured Souls" collection and are easily found on eBay, with prices ranging from cheap to "well...maybe later." They could easily fit into the Cenobite mythos, and are frequently listed with the keywords of "Cenobite" or "Hellraiser."

 

I have been looking around at other figures which could fit into the Cenobite realm, and the ideas I have for action figure photography, but having never been interested in collecting action figures before, I'm sure I"m missing on my keyword search. Suggestions are always welcome.

 

Spoiler

Hi, my name is Lucidique, and I'm an alcoholic...

EDIT

 

Nikon D3X, Tamron 90mm Macro, f/5.6 1/320th second, handheld

[Radium_Angel]

I think I am getting the hang of this toy photography

Shot at night, RGB keylight (set at green) with red fill on the left, a string of white LED lights way in the background.

Nikon D3x 90mm Tamron Macro, f/5.6, 1/8 sec, 100 ISO, tripod.

[Radium_Angel]

Turns out, her wings fluoresce under UV light

[Zodiark1593]

On 6/27/2021 at 7:01 PM, Radium_Angel said:

Turns out, her wings fluoresce under UV light

 

Both of those shots get a 10/10 from me! No real flaws I can pick out. 
 

i went and picked up the Sony FR 85mm F1.8 for street (I’m rather shy, so some extra reach is appreciated), event and portraits. My god, it was worth going with Sony glass this time around. Extremely sharp wide open, with minimal chromatic aberration (which were definitely problems with my current Rokinon 50mm, even stopped down a fair bit), and fast, silent autofocus. Add on top of that, this thing is also small and lightweight. 

Can’t wait to take it to the street. 

 

[Radium_Angel]

5 hours ago, Zodiark1593 said:

85mm F1.8

I've lusted after something like this for my Nikon, but have yet to justify it, but prime lenses are always a treat to own.

5 hours ago, Zodiark1593 said:

Rokinon

I've got a couple of lenses made by them that came with other bundles. Quality is variable, but if I read things right, they re-brand other lenses, which would explain this.

I'm going to assume the shot you took was wide open?

5 hours ago, Zodiark1593 said:

Both of those shots get a 10/10 from me! No real flaws I can pick out. 

Thank you kindly. I'm enjoying action figure photography way more than the fetish work I normally do

[Zodiark1593]

2 hours ago, Radium_Angel said:

I've lusted after something like this for my Nikon, but have yet to justify it, but prime lenses are always a treat to own.

I've got a couple of lenses made by them that came with other bundles. Quality is variable, but if I read things right, they re-brand other lenses, which would explain this.

I'm going to assume the shot you took was wide open?

 

In this case, I shot at F5.6. I’ve a few shots at F1.8, but mostly to learn the lens. I’ll have some more once I finally take this thing on the street. 
 

From what I understand, Rokinon is a rebrand of Samyang for the US market. The 50mm is very sharp when stopped down to F8, and even at faster apertures, a little bit of softness isn’t the end of the world, and depending on subject, I’d probably soften in post anyway. At about F4 and faster however, the Chromatic aberration gets pretty excessive. Even after some work, I’ve had visible color fringing sneak it’s way into a few my final prints. 
 

The Sony lens at F1.8 exhibits less color fringing (as in, you need to pixel peep to see it) than my 50mm at F4.

 

[Radium_Angel]

Working with fireworks is difficult.

 

[Radium_Angel]

Cheap sparkler and some cut down wood.

Nikon D3x, ~1sec 90mm Macro f/5.6

RGB light for key light at 45 degrees to the front right of Jack (the werewolf)