Whats a good intro book to understand optics that is technical but doesn't completely overwhelm (bonus if it includes how vision works from a physiological level)?
Photography for geeks
71–80 of 150 posts
Re: Photography for geeks
#72This article doesn't touch on the most important aspect of the trade, something that makes a shot into a photograph: the choice of a subject.
You can make the most technically perfect shot, and yet it would still look bland and empty and boring if you don't have a subject.
No amount of technical understanding will help you choose a subject, as it has to do with with curiosity for the world and the art of observation.
A shot originates in your camera. A photograph originates in your brain.
Worth reading, in my opinion even before you pick up any technical book: Roland Barthes - Camera Lucida, reflections on photography.
Re: Photography for geeks
#73Whats a good intro book to understand optics that is technical but doesn't completely overwhelm (bonus if it includes how vision works from a physiological level)?
Re: Photography for geeks
#74Longer focal length, more zoom, more perspective compression, more blur outside of the focus area.
Wider open arperture, more light on the sensor, more blur outside of the focus area.
Longer exposure time, more light on the sensor, more motion blur.
Bigger sensor sensitivity (ISO), more light collected per unit of time, more grain/noise.
Bigger sensor, bigger field of view, more blur outside of the area of focus.
Then you also have neutral density filters (ND filters), which allow you to modify the exposure time/aperture while keeping the ISO where it is (e.g. if you wanna blur the background in bright sunlight).
You become a good fotographer if these interconnections are so well understood you don't need to think about them anymore — and you can focus your effort on finding the right combination of camera position, angle and lense settings.
The position and angle is what makes and breaks a good picture. This is why a good photographer with a smartphone takes better pictures than an amateur with a Hasselblad.
Re: Photography for geeks
#75Earlier quoted context omitted.
> ISO is basically a linear gain that's done on the sensor. It's usually not done on the sensor - it's usually done by the ADC that performs sensor readout. Some cameras use a technology like Aptina-DRPix to dynamically change the capacitance of the sensor FETs, but (as far as I'm aware) this only exists in a simple binary form right now. E.g. one of my cameras reduces sensor gate capacitance when the ISO exceeds 800…
Right, sorry. Not on the sensor, but the hardware that's reads it off the .. which I guess is not technically the sensor.. haha You're still multiplying what is the photo-count or shotnoise Didn't know there is technology built on top of that... Does changing the capacitance increase the sensitivity somehow? I guess then the question is.. why isn't that always enabled. There must be some downside to it
U=Q/C
The pixels output voltage is the charge (number of photoelectrons) divided by the integrating capacitance. Reducing the capacitance increases sensitivity at the expense of full-well capacity - because the saturation voltage is reached earlier. That’s the point at which highlights blow out.
The advantage of increased sensitivity at the integration node is that all downstream noise is applied to a larger signal, so SNR is improved.
Re: Photography for geeks
#76This article doesn't touch on the most important aspect of the trade, something that makes a shot into a photograph: the choice of a subject. You can make the most technically perfect shot, and yet it would still look bland and empty and boring if you don't have a subject. No amount of technical understanding will help you choose a subject, as it has to do with with curiosity for the world and the art of observation.…
Counter point, directly from the article:
> An intriguing interplay of light and shadows can make a discarded candy wrapper look profound.
And I agree. I recently saw "good" photos of a mundane university bathroom, but they were intriguing.
Re: Photography for geeks
#77All good advices. I've been taking pictures for a decade and reading books really does help more than a lot of online stuff you find. Also, looking at masters' photographs and reasoning about how they were made. After some time when I thought composition was all that mattered, I realised that light is all that matters. I use only natural light, so that means I shoot only when the intersection of good light and free t…
Time. It takes time and preparation to wait for the right light at the right place. Waking-up early is oft very well rewarded.
Yes of course, if one has time, studying a place in various times is highly valuable
Re: Photography for geeks
#78This article doesn't touch on the most important aspect of the trade, something that makes a shot into a photograph: the choice of a subject. You can make the most technically perfect shot, and yet it would still look bland and empty and boring if you don't have a subject. No amount of technical understanding will help you choose a subject, as it has to do with with curiosity for the world and the art of observation.…
Counter point, directly from the article: > An intriguing interplay of light and shadows can make a discarded candy wrapper look profound. And I agree. I recently saw "good" photos of a mundane university bathroom, but they were intriguing.
Yeah, I seem to understand the art of photography goes through different stages of mastery:
- Level 0: Newbie.
- Level 1: The art of lighting, composition and colour theory, i.e. this article. This is very technical and scientific.
- Level 2: The choice of subject and hidden meaning, if any, of the picture. This is more abstract and "artistic."
Many skilled photographers don't go past level 1. I reckon the reason photography is such a common hobby is because it can attract both technically- and artistically-minded people.
Re: Photography for geeks
#79Longer focal length, more zoom, more perspective compression, more blur outside of the focus area. Wider open arperture, more light on the sensor, more blur outside of the focus area. Longer exposure time, more light on the sensor, more motion blur. Bigger sensor sensitivity (ISO), more light collected per unit of time, more grain/noise. Bigger sensor, bigger field of view, more blur outside of the area of focus. The…
> You become a good fotographer if these interconnections are so well understood you don't need to think about them anymore — and you can focus your effort on finding the right combination of camera position, angle and lense settings.
Much like any skill: music, computer programming, cooking, etc. Mastering the technical fundamentals liberates you from having to worry about the technical fundamentals.
Re: Photography for geeks
#80Seeing as this is photography for geeks : Colour temperature is exactly that, a temperature. Things glow when hot, with the colour of the light depending on the temperature and the material. When you say "a colour temperature of 6200 K" it means the light is the same colour as that emitted by an ideal black body at that temperature. It's no coincidence we perceive colour temperatures around the high 5k to low 6k as w…
In practice vast majority of scenes are not illuminated (directly) by a blackbody source, so for white balance purpose its inherently crude tool to achieve a color look, and often there is no "correct" color temperature setting for a scene