Harold Bettes
Sr. Member
  
Offline
Age: 70
Location: High Country (7000'MSL)
Posts: 304
huntin' for signs
|
 |
« on: May 31, 2008, 07:19:52 PM » |
|
Howdy All, I have recently gained a Nikon CoolPix 950 digital camera to add to my camera bag and need some guidance for salt shots. Most of my previous camera experience at Bonneville has been my old 35mm bag of Pentax stuff and I learned about the background problems and reflected light pretty quickly. I wanted to get some digital shots of stuff as well and I came by the Nikon for freebies from one of my kids (they got a higher zoot Nikon piece). I have used the Nikon for taking pics for both my books, but nothing out on the salt yet and I want to reduce the learning curve if I can. Any advice or quick guidance would help I think. Thanks in advance. Regards to All, HB2 
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
If it was easy, everybody would be doing it.
|
|
|
|
|
Stainless1
Global Moderator
Hero Member
  
Offline
Age: 62
Location: Wichita KS
Posts: 4421
Robert W. P. "Stainless" Steele Wichita, Kansas
|
 |
« Reply #2 on: May 31, 2008, 07:46:09 PM » |
|
HB, most of the digitals are just point and shoot. Some have manual modes, but unless you are a real creative person, it won't help a lot. Go out in the snow and take some pictures, unless it is all gone, that will help with the pictures. Do you know if your camera has a manual mode?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Stainless MSA Lakester #1000 my fastest mile 245 and change, 84 ci turbobusa motor... but Corey's 233 MPH H/BFL record is still 3MPH faster than mine. Builder of Bike 278 1000cc APS-G, Kids Red Hat Record 208.959 (old PS rules) Other kids A-G record 179.172 Josh O record 182.266 Co-owner of the Amo Steele Streamliner, #1411... still sorting
|
|
|
|
Peter Jack
|
 |
« Reply #3 on: May 31, 2008, 07:55:23 PM » |
|
Stainless:
If you look at the pictures on Sum's website with my name on them they were shot with a Panasonic DMC FZ50 set for snow. There's a picture of your car but I believe it was under the canopy if I remember correctly. The snow setting worked like a dream.
Pete
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
My avatar shows Tok, a 100# Alaskan Malamute. He's the one who runs everything around here.
|
|
|
Milwaukee Midget
Global Moderator
Hero Member
  
Offline
Age: 53
Location: Beerhaven, Wisconsin
Posts: 3158
If in doubt, it probably IS a mistake.
|
 |
« Reply #4 on: May 31, 2008, 08:34:45 PM » |
|
Hi, Harold -
My wife has the 7900 series Nikon, a darkroom in the basement, and has sold cameras, so she was my go-to girl on this.
You should be able to go into the exposure compensation setting and go plus a couple of stops, but she makes a good point - do some experiments and bracket some shots - you're not committed to film, and if you duck under someone's tent in the shade, you should be able to tell pretty quickly what's working and what's not.
Cheers, Chief!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"Information - we want - information"
|
|
|
|
Freud
|
 |
« Reply #5 on: May 31, 2008, 10:00:22 PM » |
|
The theory of the light meter still governs even a digital camera.
White, when metered, reflects 36% more light than the grey card, upon which exposure is based. That is a 2 stop correction.
The salt is very reflective. Contrast, on the shadow side, can be way less than is generally the case. If the automatic exposure camera reads any subject that is darker than white, it will give an adequate exposure. If the reflectance from the salt influences the exposure, you will be under exposed. An incident meter will show the normal exposure to be 3/4 to 1 stop less than at sea level. You are at 4300 feet and there is very little pollution out there. But, that is different than the white giving you an underexposed image.
It's just like tuning a fuel system. You have to know something about what you are doing but with digital cameras, programs are available to bail yourself out when you don't know what you are doing.
The nice thing about auto exposure cameras is that if they mess up it's generally in the same direction all the time. Correction is not a huge problem.
Just shoot away. Someone can bail you out if u made mistakes.
FREUD
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Since '63
|
|
|
Old Gringo
Newbie
Offline
Age: 72
Location: Orange,Ca
Posts: 41
I only drive with the motor not running.
|
 |
« Reply #6 on: May 31, 2008, 11:17:22 PM » |
|
Howdy All, I have recently gained a Nikon CoolPix 950 digital camera to add to my camera bag and need some guidance for salt shots. Most of my previous camera experience at Bonneville has been my old 35mm bag of Pentax stuff and I learned about the background problems and reflected light pretty quickly. I wanted to get some digital shots of stuff as well and I came by the Nikon for freebies from one of my kids (they got a higher zoot Nikon piece). I have used the Nikon for taking pics for both my books, but nothing out on the salt yet and I want to reduce the learning curve if I can. Any advice or quick guidance would help I think. Thanks in advance. Regards to All, HB2  HB2, I would sugest in addition to the other replies that you would need a digital polarizing filter. If you have ever tried polarized sunglasses you will understand. If not I sugest that you invest in both sunglasses and a filter for your viewing pleasure. For the salt, beach, high elevation and reflective surfaces, polarized is a must.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: June 01, 2008, 06:10:51 PM by Old Gringo »
|
Logged
|
Ex Hound Dog Crew Chief. Retired Xeroid.
|
|
|
|
Dean Los Angeles
|
 |
« Reply #7 on: June 01, 2008, 11:55:28 AM » |
|
You didn't make it clear if this is your first digital camera. No matter. What ever you have done in the past, you are not taking enough pictures. If you don't come back with more than a thousand you haven't even started.
With my first digital camera I took over 13,000 pictures. I stopped counting with the second.
I keep one battery on the charger in the car and change about mid day. Get a the largest memory card you can put in the camera. And a spare. It doesn't involve a lot of money.
The cost per thousand? Zero. Printing pictures does cost money, but you can sort out the best of the bunch. Uploading ALL of the pictures for everyone to see . . . Priceless.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Well, it used to be Los Angeles . . . 50 miles north of Fresno now. Just remember . . . It isn't life or death. It's bigger than life or death! It's RACING.
|
|
|
Harold Bettes
Sr. Member
  
Offline
Age: 70
Location: High Country (7000'MSL)
Posts: 304
huntin' for signs
|
 |
« Reply #8 on: June 01, 2008, 01:34:36 PM » |
|
Hey Guys,  Thanks for all the good suggestions and recommendations.  I have used digital cameras before but always on much easier subject material than opportunity shots at Bonneville. Your suggestions have made the pathway a lot more easy to travel.  Thanks again.  Regards to All, HB2
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
If it was easy, everybody would be doing it.
|
|
|
Old Gringo
Newbie
Offline
Age: 72
Location: Orange,Ca
Posts: 41
I only drive with the motor not running.
|
 |
« Reply #9 on: June 01, 2008, 06:09:13 PM » |
|
Howdy All, I have recently gained a Nikon CoolPix 950 digital camera to add to my camera bag and need some guidance for salt shots. Most of my previous camera experience at Bonneville has been my old 35mm bag of Pentax stuff and I learned about the background problems and reflected light pretty quickly. I wanted to get some digital shots of stuff as well and I came by the Nikon for freebies from one of my kids (they got a higher zoot Nikon piece). I have used the Nikon for taking pics for both my books, but nothing out on the salt yet and I want to reduce the learning curve if I can. Any advice or quick guidance would help I think. Thanks in advance. Regards to All, HB2  HB2, I would sugest in addition to the other replies that you would need a digital polarizing filter. If you have ever tried polarized sunglasses you will understand. If not I sugest that you invest in both sunglasses and a filter for your viewing pleasure. For the salt, beach, high elevation and reflective surfaces, polarized is a must.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Ex Hound Dog Crew Chief. Retired Xeroid.
|
|
|
|
Freud
|
 |
« Reply #10 on: June 01, 2008, 11:52:25 PM » |
|
A polarizer is fine unless you use a rather wide angle lens.
FREUD
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Since '63
|
|
|
|