PDA

View Full Version : better pics....


herr_major_is_i
06-12-2006, 04:49 PM
any reccommendations as to a nice 5+ megapixel digital camera (preferably an SLR) for really cheap, so I shall never need see something like this again?

my buddy wanted me to take his pic at ACEN (cosplayed as a Zeon officer) but my camera really sux and recorded this nightmare onto film and i was really disappointed, having taken photography courses at college... anyone got a really good pic of him? he always used this salute, and i think he was the ony Zeon officer that looked like this. His name tag read, "Kurz Weber"

Oklahoma
06-12-2006, 05:51 PM
There are plenty of good digital cameras out there. I would look at possibly a Nikon D50 or a Canon Digital Rebel. Both are very good cameras. You would have to look a FEW years back to find a digital slr with less than 6 megapixals now. Both of those are under 900 new and a fair amount less for a slightly used one. Expect to spend usually around 500+ for a dslr even many used ones.

staereo
06-13-2006, 10:04 AM
And from the noise in that photo, outside of new camera, i will suggest 3 simple tips.

Light
More Light
Even MORE Light...

You'd find that picture would likely get much better if it were brighter in the room when you took it.
Bruce

Eriol
06-13-2006, 10:55 AM
I agree with Staereo.

The problem is not the megapixels of the camera, but the amount of ambient light in that photo. It appears the room you took the picture in did not have a lot of light, and the flash didn't give enough light to compensate. It also looks like the camera's light sensitivity was increased (high ISO) to compensate, but it was still not sufficient to get a properly exposed shot. When a camera's light sensivity goes up, you get "noise" in the photo. The noise pattern is the pattern of little pixels/specks of color in the photo.

Even with a high-end camera, you would still have had a potentially bad photo under those conditions.

staereo
06-13-2006, 11:24 AM
...ran it through noise ninja for you... too much more removal of noise than this and it would lose detail...

best way to fix it is more light, as Eriol expanded on.

also, try to be sure youre not using center spot metering on an image like this.

Bruce

herr_major_is_i
06-14-2006, 02:32 PM
well, i really appreciate your comments, and thanks for the suggestions. unfortunately, this is a 35mm disposable. I can usully manipulate this circumstance in which a disposble is all i have, and get great pics from one. Most of the film from the camera was excellent except for few and this was one of them... I dont even own a digital cmera.

staereo
06-14-2006, 02:54 PM
Wow... I hate when people dont pay attention to posts... and I just didnt pay attention to your first one...

If that is what your original looked like, not just the scan, then thats what we call grain..... same idea, but its a chemical's version.

If its just on the scan, then you need to check the scanner functions.

My apologies for not paying better attention,
Bruce

Eriol
06-14-2006, 09:51 PM
well, i really appreciate your comments, and thanks for the suggestions. unfortunately, this is a 35mm disposable. I can usully manipulate this circumstance in which a disposble is all i have, and get great pics from one. Most of the film from the camera was excellent except for few and this was one of them... I dont even own a digital cmera.

Oops, you did take photography courses in college...if you made acceptable pictures with a disposable, then I guess you were not lucky with this shot. It could be the film, as Staereo says. I've seen weird things sometimes in film. Maybe that particular part of the film was bad.

If you want an inexpensive 5 megapixel digital camera, you can look at the Canon Powershot A530, Fujifilm Finepix A500, Nikon Coolpix 5600, or the Olympus D595 Zoom. They all are under $200. These are point-and-shoot cameras, so they will have shutter lag and you probably have to use the LCD to take the shot (most point-and-shoot cameras' viewfinder will not give you an accurate shot).

TomodachiFriend
06-14-2006, 10:14 PM
I've seen used Canon 10D's (body only) and 300D's go for a little over $300. Ones at that price are rare but it shows that you don't have to spend a lot. I'd prefer spending my money on an old 10D than on a new shiny pocketable camera.

I wonder what's the recycling time for the flash on those disposables. Low batteries = increased recyle time => Maybe that's the reason why only some pictures came out bad.

herr_major_is_i
06-14-2006, 11:05 PM
sweet... cameras for less than $500! maybe i can get one for my 21st birthday..

Jurai
06-15-2006, 01:33 AM
I own a canon 20D. It makes pretty good pictures, aless it isn't a full formated camera. So that's why i have my eyes on a canon 5D DSLR camera.

I wouldn't recommend anybody to buy a canon eos 10D. Ofcourse, it's a nice one, but not all objectives for other canon cameras are comparing to eos 10D. That's what i have heard and what i have read.

Maybe you wont need an expensive DSLR camera, for getting better pics. I'm sure a simple 5 Mpix camera, extended with an extern flashlight will be the better choice. The picture, you have linked, would have been better, with more light, i guarantee you.

Jurai :skidude2: