Questions about taking pictures of machines.

[a smile]

Why does the effect of mechanical equipment not prove to be good looking?

Why does the effect of mechanical equipment not prove to be good looking?

Who can provide a better shooting plan, skills? Does enhancing and re-enhancing the lighting have a good effect?

Why many times the micro-single camera shooting effect is not as good as the mobile phone shooting?

 

[gerritv]

Setting F stop to F11 or higher will increase depth of field (more items in focus. Likely need more light to make that work well. I use OpenCamera on Android to get more control over the process. I also use my Pentax K5 for the more artistic efforts.

 

[a smile]

Setting F stop to F11 or higher will increase depth of field (more items in focus. Likely need more light to make that work well. I use OpenCamera on Android to get more control over the process. I also use my Pentax K5 for the more artistic efforts.

This is a brand new field, and I need to invest a lot of time to study, I think I really do not have the time and energy, I think my requirements are not high, I can shoot relatively clear and smooth. Too many technical parameters I don't think I can master. Because photography is a big subject. If you try to increase the indoor light can shoot clearly for me.

Thank you very much for your reply, let me learn some skills!

In addition, will 35mm fixed focus be more suitable for shooting machining videos?

 

[terry_g]

Point and shoot cameras are limited when it comes to image quality. Some are better than others though.
A digital SLR that lets you control aperture and exposure time. once mastered you can produce better pictures.
Post processing is also important.

 

[combustable herbage]

Personally I am happy with the quality of your pics, I wouldn't worry too much, better to just upload the pics you get rather than frustrate yourself with a bunch of photo editing. People are here to see your great handiwork and not your photo skills.

 

[Tomc938]

Personally I am happy with the quality of your pics, I wouldn't worry too much, better to just upload the pics you get rather than frustrate yourself with a bunch of photo editing. People are here to see your great handiwork and not your photo skills.

I agree. The photos come through clear enough for me.

My wife has a digital SLR camera, and I have an iPhone 8. On my computer or a 4"x 6" print I can't tell who took what photo.

 

[PeterT]

I find that digital pics tend to pick up on machining marks & make the surface look worse than it really is. At least at ordinary exposure. Any kind of flash really exaggerates the issue.
Unless you have daylight or well lit background ceiling light, its hard to juggle the parameters. Most of my machining parts are small so I have a dedicated magnifying lens with an integrated LED 'mini' ring light. best money I ever spent. Although often times my Iphone does a bettre job in all honesty. The little lens light isn't super powerful but doesn't need to be at short distances. But it helps a lot because I don't have the patience or funds for those professional ring flashes. I also bought a used camera cord so I can hand hold my regular flash, then it does the same metering in Auto-Stupid mode. Agree with Gerrit thouh, most of mine at F11 for DOF, have sufficient light & it figures out the rest.

Just as an aside, I bought this el-cheap LED light, battery powered. Just starting to play now but so far I'm actually impressed. Its a softer diffused light, you can dial intensity & temp. And it has fittings that integrate to typical mount or on a mini tripod or stand or whatever. (t's obviously not a triggered flash , just passive light). I want to ultimately stick it to or in proximity of a hand held video cam where lighting is insufficient. LED's & strips are so cheap these days, you can make your own soft boxes into all kinds of form factors.

 

[Mcgyver]

I read once that the difference between a pro and and amateur photographer is 10,000 shots.....in other words experience and experimentation. Fortunately, in the digital age, the barrier to do so is gone!

I've done a fair bit and probably have over 1000 photo's in print via articles I've done on machining. Not that all are great, but its provided a reason to try to get better. I would say the three most basic things are 1) don't use an on camera flash, 2) use a tripod and 3) use a real camera (something you can control, not a phone or point and shoot). Then start learning the basics of composition, lighting, exposure etc. Take hundreds of shots each time. Try stuff, e.g. sometimes awesome lighting is just moving the item near window, painting with a flashlight on a long exposure, positioning a reflector covered in aluminum foil or putting light a bulb off to the side. It doesn't have to be expensive or elaborate. Here's in incomplete article, work in progress, on my web site giving some of the basics that I have found works for me.

Ideas on Workshop Photography - Metallum

Ideas on Workshop Photography

www.metallum.shop

 

[Susquatch]

I read once that the difference between a pro and and amateur photographer is 10,000 shots.....in other words experience and experimentation. Fortunately, in the digital age, the barrier to do so is gone!

Excellent Mcgyver. Nice read too. Way better than a YouTube video.

Amateur Photography was one of my many hobbies for years. I've drifted away from it mostly because the cameras in a modern cell phone are so amazing. They don't really compare to a digital SLR, but plenty good enough under most circumstances considering you always have it with you. The result is a higher number of good shots though the ratio is prolly much lower.

I've tended away from caring a lot about my own photos, but I do notice when someone else goes the extra mile. @thestelster comes to mind.

The photos is the article above and in your published works are excellent. My sincere compliments.

 

[PeterT]

Yes good read. And @Mcgyver articles/photos speak for themselves.

Just to be clear, my go to mini macro lens for my predominantly small stuff mounted to my ancient but reliable Canon T3i. It has an integrated 'mini' ring flash, 2 settings. But its basically dumb light conveniently orientated at lens axis, the operator/camera has to do the rest in terms of exposure, DOF.... When you get close to things, its harder to control indirect light. Well, that's a lazy mans excuse. There are all kinds of great ways to properly light small things, but requires a bit more time & setup than point & shoot. The classic ring flash has all kinds of settings but more money & its a bit clunky. The nice thing about TTL meter flash in any form is you can make more adjustments. Sometimes I'll just take my regular flash off, hold it in some more convenient position or bounce off another surface & use the cord/hot shoe. But yes, flash & metal don't typically give the most pleasing result without at least some softening.

 

[CWret]

Here's in incomplete article, work in progress, on my web site giving some of the basics that I have found works for me.

Excellent article in the works. An interesting read with good advice for both pro and amateur.

25 to 40 years ago i was an enthusiastic photographer. Back in the 35mm film days with a CanonA1 (armed with lots of lens and a power winder) i had fun and managed to take a few good pics. I also took many hundreds of terrible ones too. I drifting away from photography and the need for expensive equipment. I do have a nice little Sony RX100-III. It’s compact, very easy to use, is quite control-able and takes better photos than my iPhone but i wish it had a hot shoe (to control a remote flash). I’m certainly not in Mcgyver territory but my photos have been in trade magazines.
For my purposes, photographs were a valuable tool for analyzing processes and evaluating modifications, particularly the affects of millisecond timing changes.

 

[Susquatch]

Back in the 35mm film days with a CanonA1 (armed with lots of lens and a power winder) i had fun and managed to take a few good pics.

An A1 fan here too! Still have it! Still works!

But I have a nice Canon Digital SLR now.

And to be @totally honest, I think my Samsung Android takes amazing photographs - certainly better than required for most things. They are not as good as an SLR when you blow them up, but for nice table top or cabinet top 8x10 or 8.5x11 photos, they are just fine. It also has controls for most camera features like exposure, aperature, shutter speed, pretend film speed, etc etc. There are 4 lenses built in to the phone too. All tiny but still amazing performance. Not gunna argue about how they compare to an SLR, but will say good enough for most photos.

 

[CWret]

An A1 fan here too! Still have it! Still works!

IMO the A1 was an awesome camera. The best premium full featured SLR that Canon ever produced. Back in the day, Canon was hands down the best. I still have mine but it hasn’t seen a roll of film for many years. No reason to think it’s still not working just fine.

 

[a smile]

Thank you all for your enthusiastic responses!

I've come to understand that light is always the most important source of problems.

Photos taken by mobile phones are easy to control the brightness of the shot, and if you don't zoom in on the details, it seems to work better than photos taken by DSLRS.

I will try to distinguish the use of the scene to choose to use the phone or the SLR to shoot.

 

[a smile]

Yes good read. And @Mcgyver articles/photos speak for themselves.

Just to be clear, my go to mini macro lens for my predominantly small stuff mounted to my ancient but reliable Canon T3i is this. Has an integrated 'mini' ring flash, 2 settings. But its basically dumb light convenintly orientated, operator/camera has to do the rest. When you get close to things, its harder to direct indirect light. Well, that's a lazy mans excuse. There are all kinds of great ways to properly light small things, but requires a bit more time & setup than point & shoot. The classic ring light has all kinds of settings but more money & its a bit clunky. The nice thing about TTL meter flash is you can make more adjustments. Sometimes I'll just take my regular flash off & use the cord. But yes, flash & metal don't typically give the most pleasing result without at least some softening.

View attachment 38668View attachment 38669

A few days ago, I configured a flash, but the flash time is always out of sync, and the photos taken are dimmer, perhaps it is the problem of the setting, and I have no choice but to return it. In addition, using flash to shoot metal is easy to cause reflective interference, so you still need to spend more energy on the light.

 

[a smile]

I agree. The photos come through clear enough for me.

My wife has a digital SLR camera, and I have an iPhone 8. On my computer or a 4"x 6" print I can't tell who took what photo.

I agree. The photos come through clear enough for me.

My wife has a digital SLR camera, and I have an iPhone 8. On my computer or a 4"x 6" print I can't tell who took what photo.

Yes, this is also the same result that I got, which confused me for a long time, and gave up the SLR several times, because under the same conditions, the SLR is more difficult to take suitable photos.

I accepted the advice of forum friends to form their own channel on youtube, so the main role of SLR is to shoot video.

 

[a smile]

Excellent article in the works. An interesting read with good advice for both pro and amateur.

25 to 40 years ago i was an enthusiastic photographer. Back in the 35mm film days with a CanonA1 (armed with lots of lens and a power winder) i had fun and managed to take a few good pics. I also took many hundreds of terrible ones too. I drifting away from photography and the need for expensive equipment. I do have a nice little Sony RX100-III. It’s compact, very easy to use, is quite control-able and takes better photos than my iPhone but i wish it had a hot shoe (to control a remote flash). I’m certainly not in Mcgyver territory but my photos have been in trade magazines.
For my purposes, photographs were a valuable tool for analyzing processes and evaluating modifications, particularly the affects of millisecond timing changes.

I admire your hobby of photography, which requires a lot of time, money and patience. This is not an impossible task for me now, I have so many things to learn now.

I am not happy with the results of the SLR because the photos it takes are always a little underbright, I am in the process of revamping my lighting, hoping to make up for my shortcomings in shooting technology by adding better lighting.

 

[Susquatch]

I am not happy with the results of the SLR because the photos it takes are always a little underbright, I am in the process of revamping my lighting, hoping to make up for my shortcomings in shooting technology by adding better lighting.

Two things I have found might help you.

First, my phone camera doesn't really need a lot of extra light to take good photos as long as I am willing to extend the exposure instead. Of course, this means holding it still. But the anti vibration features of the phone help with this too.

The other thing is that post processing can do miracles.

Of course, none of this makes up for the need for proper lighting angles and coverage to avoid shadows, highlight features, and add textural qualities.

However, the ability to take photos in lower light levels is very powerful if you work with it instead of fighting it. It's darker uniformity can be amazing.

 

[JustaDB]

Lighting, lighting, lighting. And, when you've mastered that, check your lighting.

Doesn't matter if your DOF is perfect, doesn't matter if the subject is in focus, doesn't matter if the composition is beyond compare. If the subject isn't lit properly, none of the above matters. And, post-processing will only fix limited issues. It won't turn a sow's ear into a silk purse.

This coming from someone w/ over 600,000 digital images and thousands of hours of Photoshop under his belt.

 

[Susquatch]

To be clear, I'm not advocating dark lighting or post processing. Just saying that sometimes they can save your bacon. They have saved mine more than a few times.