|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
register |
bbs |
search |
rss |
faq |
about
|
 |
 |
meet up |
add to del.icio.us |
digg it
|
 |
 |
| Technophiliacs & Technophiles The Technophiliacs forum is for discussing any and all forms of tech and other types of social backwardness. Including discussions of strange home-brewed hardware technology. Where to get good tools. How to make fiberglass molds. Computer hardware and software technolgy, including operating systems, applications, networking, hardware, CPU's, disk drives, and other geeky things. Viruses and Artificial Life discussions. How to write HTML. End user tools discussions and support issues. Gating the Internet with other nets. |
 |
|
|
#1
 2002-04-21, 23:14
|
Empireblues 
Regular
|
|
|
|
Photography
Yes, I've posted this in other forums BUT, just to get maximum readers:
Does anyone know what a "Grey card" is? I'm interested in getting into Black and White photography and have been told that this is an essential piece of eqipment (?).
It may be to do with the development, I don't know.
|
|
#2
 2002-04-22, 03:52
|
|
Forum Administrator
|
|
Columbus Ohio
|
|
Re: Photography
The "Grey Card" is an indispensable aid for the photographer who is trying to establish proper exposure under difficult lighting conditions. All meters, including those in cameras, are collaborated to read the average scene in shades of grey; the 18% grey card corresponds to the light reflectance of an average scene. For example, if a photographer is trying to photograph a scene with a very dark or very light colored background which would throw his exposure meter reading off, he can instead take his reading off a grey card which would establish proper exposure.
|
|
#3
 2002-04-22, 06:11
|
syphon detonator 
Regular
|
|
|
|
Re: Photography
zok pretty much explained but ill add this, its all about the white balance.
why type of camera do you have?
|
|
#4
 2002-04-23, 17:58
|
Empireblues 
Regular
|
|
|
|
Re: Photography
An olympus OM-2. Cheers for the info by the way, I went and looked it up in a photography glossary too - it makes sense now.
When I say that I'm interested in B+W photography, I'm only just getting into photography in general...so here's another dumb question - much obliged if you could lend your wisdom.
If you're generally supposed to have a larger aperture in lower light, and considering that aperture also determines the depth of field, how is it possible (as I'm sure it must be, and I'm just being ignorant), to have a greater depth of field in lower light?
Hope that made sense. Comments appreciated.
|
|
#5
 2002-04-23, 18:15
|
syphon detonator 
Regular
|
|
|
|
Re: Photography
set your apature to your liking and just increase the exposure time to allow sufficent light into the lens. its not always possible with all subjects. if its a moving subject then forget it. i use an AE1 from cannon. its old but its good, in my opinion better than most eos's since they are all plastic pieces of shit. if you want to learn and you have the money then get a digital slr. its much better tahna film box to learn with. you can instantly see the results and take pics of everything and never worry about the cost of film. if your serious a digital slr pays for it self in a matter of monthes. i have like like 3000 shots with my kodak and it has helped, unfortunatly its not a slr (just the point and shoot crap  )
|
|
#6
 2002-04-23, 19:28
|
Empireblues 
Regular
|
|
|
|
Re: Photography
Hmm - I was considering those exact factors. The cost of film and developing is pretty hefty, but if there are all these advantages to digital photography, then why do people stick to film photography? There has to be some drawback!
|
|
#7
 2002-04-23, 19:42
|
cense 
Regular
|
|
|
|
Re: Photography
Its just like in the music business: some guitar players like analogue pedals better than digital ones, they claim a fuller, better toned sound. I think its basically just being picky between analogue and digital. Something about the feeling of a true B+W photograph though....
-- cEnsE
|
|
#8
 2002-04-23, 22:51
|
syphon detonator 
Regular
|
|
|
|
Re: Photography
at this point digitals simplyt cannot match film for versatility speed and quality. if your doing 35mm you will be very pleased with a decent digital slr but pros mostly use film for several big reasons.
in small prints digitals can compete but when it comes to magazine covers and other large page layouts there is a noticable difference between the two.
film is far more advanced in terms of speed and efficent use of lighting. if you do a lot of sporting photography then a film slr is essential. some of the new pro digital slrs will be almost as good with light but still lack frame rate of film cameras due to space limitations in the body and the sheer price of memory (ram not cf, sm, etc.). digitals use ram as a buffer to store photos untill they are written to the memory card so when you use high resolutions your pics get above 1 meg a piece which takes time to write to the memory card and must be stored in a small amount of ram.
if you want the low dowm on all the sweet gear then go to www.dpreview.com . in my opinion they are the best digital site. look at the galeries for the pro level slr's like the nikon d1x. read the reviews for any model you are considering.
if you have questions you can email me.
|
|
#9
 2002-04-24, 17:25
|
Empireblues 
Regular
|
|
|
|
Re: Photography
Thanks very much for the info. May email if more probs etc - cheers.
|
|
 |
 |
To the best of our knowledge, the text on this page may be freely reproduced and distributed.

totse.com certificate signatures
|
 |
 |
About | Community | Bad Ideas | Drugs | Ego | Erotica | Fringe | Society | Technology
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|