Would a flash help at this?

sincere · Apr 13, 2008

I got the kitlens and a 50/1.4 and whenever i take the cam out in the evening to shoot some flicks, the pics arent the sharpest and they have this orangeish color like the one on the bottom.

The kitlens focuses easier but the 50/1.4 often has problems focusing. Because i wanted to be abnle to shoot spontaneously, the cam is set to P mode. I dont like the way the colors come out on the embeded flash so i was wondering if i did have an external, where i could set the flash, would i still have theser color / focus issues?

JerryPH · Apr 13, 2008

1 - Learn about controling WB or white balance.

2 - Learn about DOF or Depth of Field.

Would a flash help some here? Yes it would, mostly if it was off camera and subtle.

BTW, DRUNKENMASTA's photostream is private so I could not check out the original pic's EXIF data for more info.

sincere · Apr 13, 2008

Aaaah..i completely didnt look into white balance, how could i forget?

I dont really understand your post. WB IS white balance and DOF also IS depth of field. Also, what exactly is it that you think i should learn? You gotta give me a little more info here because it doesnt make too much sense to thriow a few words around here.

Btw why did you write my photobucket name in CAPS? Weird..

Tiberius47 · Apr 13, 2008

The pictures have the colour cast because the camera is set to the wrong white balance. try setting it to "tungsten" or "incadescant" for shots lit by lightbulbs.

The people just back a bit from your subject are blurry because they are out of the depth of field. Try setting your aperture a little narrower (adjusting your shutter speed to compensate) to increase the depth of field to get them back in focus.

You might also try raising your ISO up to 400 or so to let you use a shorter shutter speed. That will help to reduce movement blur.

JerryPH · Apr 13, 2008

sincere said:
Aaaah..i completely didnt look into white balance, how could i forget?

I dont really understand your post. WB IS white balance and DOF also IS depth of field. Also, what exactly is it that you think i should learn? You gotta give me a little more info here because it doesnt make too much sense to thriow a few words around here.

Btw why did you write my photobucket name in CAPS? Weird..

One would think that asking about an issue as obvious in your pic as white balance denotes a level of inexperience. I used the contractions and full words for clarification based on the pic and the degree of difficulty of the question. Your usage of DOF in the pic also denotes a weakness in understanding of that concept. Could be artistic, though.

You asked how to make the picture better. I suggested you learn to better control WB and DOF. Once you know how to do that, your pictures will improve. Is that so difficult?

I wrote your name in caps to differentiate it.

Why did you choose to disseminate my initial post instead of using it as a guide to tell you where to look to better your pics? Weird.

sincere · Apr 13, 2008

Thanks a lot for the help Tiberius, this is just what i needed to know!

Mystwalker · Apr 13, 2008

To learn more about your problem ... search for "depth of field" (this is the fuzziness issue), and "white balance" (the orangey tint).

For immediate solution ... a flash will help in that it allows you to increase your f-stop which will eliminate some/all bokeh (fuzziness). I'm assuming you are shooting at f/1.4 with your 50mm. Without a flash, when you increase f-stop, you may have to increase ISO. Higher the f-stop, the less bokeh.

Book "Understanding Exposure" by Peterson is universally recommended for depth of field understanding. I just started reading it and agree.

Immediate "white balance" solution already given above, or read your camera manual.

sincere · Apr 13, 2008

Thanks Mystwalker, the problem that i also had with the DOF was that i couldnt get the lens to focus like i wanted it to in the given enviroment.

My ISO was already set to 1600.

I also didnt want to use the embedded flash because i dont like its exposure, takes away too much from the original picture in such an enviroment.

As far as WB, for some reason i didnt even think of it at all..

Village Idiot · Apr 13, 2008

I'm pretty sure that the fuzziness has to do with shutter speed and camera shake rather than DOF.

EW1066 · Apr 14, 2008

When you say that you couldn't get the camera to focus, do you also mean there was insufficient light to focus manually? Or, were you using auto focus only? I would reccomend you learn to use manual focus if your camera allows.

I have only been shooting with my digital slr for a week or two now. My time on this forum is about the same. But I am not new to photograhpy. At this point I have to say that I am amazed at the capabilities of digital and the flexability to post process. I am equally amazed by the tendency of people to rely on the bells and whistles to do the thinking for them.

Sincere, turn off everything that is automatic on you camera and learn to take pictures without the camera telling you what to do. You tell the camera what to do. It is a tool. You dont ask a wrench how to fix a car. Dont ask your camera to take the picture for you.

I cant imagine how much money some people here would have spent if they had to develope film to see what the results of their efforts were.

Done ranting....flame suit on

Vince

Village Idiot · Apr 14, 2008

EW1066 said:
When you say that you couldn't get the camera to focus, do you also mean there was insufficient light to focus manually? Or, were you using auto focus only? I would reccomend you learn to use manual focus if your camera allows.

I have only been shooting with my digital slr for a week or two now. My time on this forum is about the same. But I am not new to photograhpy. At this point I have to say that I am amazed at the capabilities of digital and the flexability to post process. I am equally amazed on the tendency of people to rely on the bells and whistles to do the thinking for them.

Sincere, turn off everything that is automatic on you camera and learn to take pictures without the camera telling you what to do. You tell the camera what to do. It is a tool. You dont ask a wrench how to fix a car. Dont ask your camera to take the picture for you.

I cant imagine how much money some people here would have spent if they had to develope film to see what the results of their efforts were.

Done ranting....flame suit on

Vince

But here's the problem. He was probably shooting at f/1.4 just to get a fast enough shutter speed. The DOF is so shallow that it's going to be nearly impossible to focus on a point manually on a subject that's moving. But if that lens is anything like the f/1.8, then it sucks at focusing in the dark.

There's a double edge sword there. Sure, a person should be able to know how to manually operate their camera, but sometimes you need those automatic features to get the shots you want.

EOS_JD · Apr 14, 2008

Shooting with the 50 f1.4 is not easy with the lens wide open. It should focus ok (so long as you are outside its minimum focusing distance).

What ISO are you using? Increase your ISO to get a shutter speed of at least 1/60th (probably faster).

You can increase ISO even more to allow a slightly smaller aperture.

using a flash will certainly help here. A 430EX with a diffuser would be a nice addition. Better if off camera but not essential.

Edit - just noted your ISO was already set to ISO1600!! More light is therefore required so a flash would indeed help a lot!

Tiberius47 · Apr 14, 2008

If you are worried about the flash ruining the mood of the shot, put a few sheets of orange celophane or a CTO gel over your flash, then bounce it off the wall. That will give the flash the same colour temperature as the ambient light.

sincere · Apr 16, 2008

Thanks for the info you guys! Btw, it was pretty dark at the place and yes i was shooting at 1.4.

Mystwalker · Apr 16, 2008

EW1066 said:
Sincere, turn off everything that is automatic on you camera and learn to take pictures without the camera telling you what to do. You tell the camera what to do. It is a tool. You dont ask a wrench how to fix a car. Dont ask your camera to take the picture for you.

I cant imagine how much money some people here would have spent if they had to develope film to see what the results of their efforts were.

"automatic" helps a beginner take better pictures ... Personally, I spend more time in Av or M, but I would not tell someone to "turn off auto". Some people (my wife) really do not care about controlling DoF and such. Like you said, the camera is a tool, AND the purpose of the tool is to take photos. Beginners are perfectly happy to stay in auto modes as long as it gets them that photo.

Your "film" assumption is not valid because personally, I hated the notion of film and didn't spend near as much money as I have for digital. I have feeling many beginners did not bother to take that many pictures during days of film. Digital photography (auto or otherwise) opened "new world" - for me it did, also made my wallet lighter.