File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
I'm getting into band photography,mostly live footage. Currently I shoot with a Nikon D40. Should I upgrade to the Nikon D80, would it be a more appropriate camera?
EXIF data available. Clickhereto show/hide.
Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATIONCamera ModelNIKON D40Camera SoftwareVer.1.10Maximum Lens Aperturef/4.0Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaColor Filter Array Pattern836Focal Length (35mm Equiv)82 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2007:10:31 10:37:03Exposure Time1/30 secF-Numberf/4.0Exposure ProgramShutter PriorityISO Speed Rating1600Exposure Bias1 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceWhite FluorescentFlashNo FlashFocal Length55.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width3008Image Height2000RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlHigh Gain UpContrastNormalSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeUnknownISO Speed Used1600Color ModeB & WImage QualityFINEWhite BalanceFLUORESCENTImage SharpeningNORMALFocus ModeAF-AFlash SettingNORMALFlash Compensation0.0 EVISO Speed Requested1600Tone CompensationNORMALLens TypeNikon G SeriesLens Range55.0 - 200.0 mm; f/4.0 - f/5.6Auto FocusClosest Subject, Center Selected, Top FocusedShooting/Bracketing ModeSingle Frame/OffColor ModePortrait sRGBLighting TypeNATURALNoise ReductionOFFCamera Actuations12901Image OptimizationBLACK AND WHITESaturation 2NORMAL
>> Anonymous
No, just get a decent wide aperture lens (30mm f1.4 if you want autofocus) And an external flash if your allowed.

Lenses make much more difference than the camera.
>> Anonymous
Get some fast glass as already shot. Shoot RAW and underexpose by half a stop to get some faster shutter speeds (pull back in post processing with no quality loss) bump the ISO up. Your set. I was working in London doing gig photography its great fun but fucking hard.
>> Anonymous
>Shoot RAW and underexpose by half a stop

Photo noob question: underexpose by half a stop? How exactly is this done?
>> Blackadder !!bSWRwu/NqzQ
>>101639

If you are using a DSLR you should have a light meter that clearly marks your predicted exposure out for you on the viewfinder and possibly on a LCD screen on the body too.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
I keep reading people saying to underexpose and turn it back up when converting the RAW.

Are you talking about this? See pic.

So put it at -1? I think I can set the increments to 0.3 or 0.5. Which should it be?
>> eku !8cibvLQ11s
>>101428
Do not listen about the flash part. Never ever use flashes. Never. Flashes are forbidden. Ever seen a fucken awsome gig photo taken with a flash? Exactly!

>>101474
Gig photography isn't harder than anything else. You just need to know what you are doing.

Use ISO1600. Shot RAW. Learn your metering. Usually my camera (30D, don't remember which metering I use), need to underexposure one or two stops if there's no smoke or any light behind the artist, or whoever I'm shooting. With smoke on the background, I might even overexposure the photo. (I've mainly shoot gigs whit heavy backlights and stuff, but one should learn quickly how to adjust exposure.)

Oh yeah, learning to post process is a very important aspect of photographing in low light. It's just something you really have to be good at. And it might even consume more time than the gig itself.

>>101426
Oh yeah. The photo just sucks. Please, try harder. Over 75% of the photo is unnecessary. It just doesn't contribute anything to the photo. The photo doesn't seem to have anything done right. Composition sucks too.
So no need to upgrade yet. Better if you learn how to composite photos and other basic.

See my portfolio (for now) for reference:
http://eku.huono.org/portfolio
>> elf_man !!DdAnyoDMfCe
>>101691
Are you OP? Either way, yes, that's the light meter, and there should be one in the viewfinder as well. Put the camera in Aperture Priority, Shutter Priority, or Manual; the control dials will let you adjust the exposure, to the right of center is under, to the left is over. Use .3 for better control. -1 is, by definition, half as much light as correct exposure. That tends to be a big difference. Experience with your camera will help you learn what's appropriate. And finally, Read The Freakin' Manual and learn to use your camera, this shit is basic.
>> Anonymous
>>101691
-1 would be minus a full stop. If you have the choice, using a 1/3 increment is preferred for finder control. Shooting a half-stop under would be halfway between the center mark and the -1.
>> eku !8cibvLQ11s
>>101694

Q.T.F.
>> Anonymous
>>101694to the right of center is under, to the left is over

Don't you mean to the right is over and to the left is under?
>> Anonymous
>>101695Shooting a half-stop under would be halfway between the center mark and the -1.

Well, yeah. That's the thing. There are only 2 marks between 0 and -1. How do I get half of that?
>> elf_man !!DdAnyoDMfCe
>>101697
On the meter in the picture, that would be correct.
On a lot of cameras, it's what I stated. So check your manual.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
Note that the "Underexpose and bring it up in post" idea only applies to very low light photography like this. Basically, what you're doing is pushing so you're effectively shooting at ISO 2400 rather than ISO1600. This lets you use a faster shutter speed for less motion blur in the dark.

In normal shooting, if you want to put the postprocessing effort into it, it's better to overexpose a bit (though not so much that you lose highlight detail) and bring it down in post.
>> Jeremo !iKGMr61IHM
>>101691

i dont see the point of shooting raw and underexposing... what the exposure is pushed up in developing it's going to bring up all the luminance noise in the shadows.
>> Anonymous
Deliberately underexposing and bringing up after should only be done if ABSOLUTELY necessary.

If you are already shooting ISO1600, you're going to have some level of noise. Bringing the brightness up will only make it more apparent.
>> eku !8cibvLQ11s
     File :-(, x)
You still need to remember that the scene might be that only the subject of the photo is partly lit, so underexposuring is still necessary to achieve correct exposure.
Dark background dominating the scene makes the camera think it should exposure more than it really should, meaning loss of face detail (etc). (This photo I had to pull one stop in PP.)
Though, it's not always the case of this. But even ISO1600 can be pushed one stop, without getting too grainy photo. And as said thousends times before, pushing in B/W is much more easier. Even three steps isn't a problem.

(Hopefully you get what I'm saying. English isn't my piece of cake.)

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS 30DCamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 WindowsPhotographerLauri KosonenMaximum Lens Aperturef/1.8Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Created2007:10:25 18:41:28Exposure Time1/90 secF-Numberf/2.0Exposure ProgramManualISO Speed Rating1600Lens Aperturef/2.0Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length50.00 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width640Image Height427RenderingNormalExposure ModeManualWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeStandard
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>101703
>it's going to bring up all the luminance noise in the shadows.
Which is better than an unusably blurry picture thanks to a too-low shutter speed.
>> Anonymous
"
i dont see the point of shooting raw and underexposing... what the exposure is pushed up in developing it's going to bring up all the luminance noise in the shadows."

Thats the thing with half a stop you can pull it back without showing the noise. If its a stop or more yes maybe but half a stop is absolutly fine. As already said if you have a black background two your going to have to anyway.
>> Anonymous
So, still how do you do half a stop on the 30D? There are only 2 markers between.
>> Anonymous
>>101915

Buy a Sony.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>101915
I dunno about the 30D, but the XTi lets you choose whether to do exposure in 1/3 or 1/2 stop increments. I have to assume there's a similar setting for the 30D.
>> Anonymous
>>101911

see

>>101702
>>101715
>> Anonymous
>>101921

Yes, same thing for the 30D. You can pick 0.3 or 0.5 increments.

Sorry for being persistent but hear me out.

-1 x x 0

Where x marks an increment. How do you get half a stop from that? Regardless of if it's 0.3 or 0.5, how do I get -0.5?
>> Anonymous
>>101921

Yes, same thing for the 30D. You can pick 0.3 or 0.5 increments.

Sorry for being stupid if it's obvious for you guys but hear me out.

-1 x x 0

Where x marks an increment. How do you get half a stop from that, regardless of if it's 0.3 or 0.5.

If you use 0.3, the first mark is -0.3, the second -0.6 and you get to -1. Makes sense.

If you use 0.5, the first mark is -0.5, the second, you're at -1 and then there's -1 again?