TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Photography for geeks

820 点作者 excite1997超过 2 年前

34 条评论

semireg超过 2 年前
The things I’m drawn to in life is where art meets science. In hindsight, so much of the secret is knowing how to avoid failure. Baking bread? Build the intuition over time and you’ll realize baking is forgiving so long as you don’t do these “5 bad things.” Gardening&#x2F;farming? Yeah, there’s a big list of bad things. Brewing beer? Another list of things to avoid. The basic rules (rooted in science) are like guardrails and everything else is the art. I love this so much.<p>In my early 20s I had a week long mind meld knowledge transfer from a self taught photographer. It made me fall in love with photography. I’m still using it to this day to photograph new label printers (black plastic is terrible to photograph) and labels (oh god they are 2D!).<p>I’m doing an OK job. Room for improvement but fine for the initial launch. You can see them here: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;mydpi.com&#x2F;products&#x2F;professional-synthetic-direct-thermal-labels" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;mydpi.com&#x2F;products&#x2F;professional-synthetic-direct-the...</a><p>In case you’re like “why is this guy selling label printers?!”<p>I’m a solo software dev that wrote Label LIVE (electron) to design and print labels. Now I’m vertically integrating with a printer I’ve imported from China and labels made in the USA.<p>Business and entrepreneurship: just avoid these 9999 things and you’ll be fine! Science and art…
评论 #33770415 未加载
评论 #33770965 未加载
评论 #33772006 未加载
throw0101c超过 2 年前
If anyone wants to move beyond using the &quot;auto&quot; setting on their camera (or phone), I would recommend the book <i>Understanding Exposure</i> by Bryan Peterson, the first edition of which was published in 1990:<p>* <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.goodreads.com&#x2F;book&#x2F;show&#x2F;142239.Understanding_Exposure" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.goodreads.com&#x2F;book&#x2F;show&#x2F;142239.Understanding_Exp...</a><p>The principles involved haven&#x27;t changed much in the intervening decades; the current fourth edition was publish in 2016.<p>If all you have is a phone you don&#x27;t have to get new equipment: just perhaps a third-party &#x27;camera app&#x27; that allows you manual control of aperture, shutter speed, ISO&#x2F;sensitivity.<p>Once you know how each of these settings alter the resulting photo you can use them to alter the composition of photos, which is a whole other craft.<p>Edit: seems recent smartphones have little-to-no adjustable camera settings.
评论 #33768826 未加载
评论 #33769853 未加载
评论 #33770701 未加载
评论 #33773808 未加载
评论 #33769243 未加载
评论 #33773550 未加载
Terretta超过 2 年前
This is very well done for a new-to-photography audience. Will be sharing around to people who say all their things look like snapshots, what&#x27;s up with that.<p>Great use of examples, except for one: kid on bridge.<p>&gt; <i>At the same time, it must be said that color and tone can be what separates a mediocre photograph from a memorable one. To illustrate, let&#x27;s look at the potential evolution of this vacation shot deliberately chosen for its mediocrity...</i><p>Then the dynamism is removed by &#x27;correcting&#x27; the dutch angle to horizon, the surprisingly good color balance is skewed off, and the whole thing gets that circa mid-2000s HDR look from Flickr and Shutterfly and the like where every photo got tone-mapped.<p>Underwhelming of an end result, especially compared to the later color and tone examples (e.g. kitchen superhero).
评论 #33769307 未加载
评论 #33769109 未加载
评论 #33773432 未加载
camillomiller超过 2 年前
This article doesn&#x27;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&#x27;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.<p>Worth reading, in my opinion even before you pick up any technical book: Roland Barthes - Camera Lucida, reflections on photography.
评论 #33771251 未加载
jwr超过 2 年前
Can we all stop for a moment to appreciate this fantastic content?<p>Great writing, with well-picked and carefully crafted examples, with lots of good (and correct) advice. On a web page. That you can just read.<p>If you don&#x27;t appreciate this, let&#x27;s describe what this website is <i>NOT</i>: it is <i>not</i> an ad-ridden cesspool of misinformation with auto-generated text interspersed with ads. It does not smack you in the face with a SUBSCRIBE NOW popup. It does not drag you through the mud of misleading &quot;customize my cookie preferences&quot; dialogs. It has zero trackers. And the information is not posted on Facebook, Tumblr, Blogger, Medium, or any of the other black holes where content goes to be stamped with &quot;SUBSCRIBE NOW LOGIN NOW&quot; popups and eventually disappear and die.<p>Michał&#x27;s writing is excellent (his &quot;Guerrilla guide to CNC and resin casting&quot; at <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;lcamtuf.coredump.cx&#x2F;gcnc&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;lcamtuf.coredump.cx&#x2F;gcnc&#x2F;</a> is a classic already), but it&#x27;s not just the writing that makes this content so great.<p>When reading this, I am reminded of the early days of the web and it makes me happy.
评论 #33771728 未加载
atoav超过 2 年前
Longer focal length, more zoom, more perspective compression, more blur outside of the focus area.<p>Wider open arperture, more light on the sensor, more blur outside of the focus area.<p>Longer exposure time, more light on the sensor, more motion blur.<p>Bigger sensor sensitivity (ISO), more light collected per unit of time, more grain&#x2F;noise.<p>Bigger sensor, bigger field of view, more blur outside of the area of focus.<p>Then you also have neutral density filters (ND filters), which allow you to modify the exposure time&#x2F;aperture while keeping the ISO where it is (e.g. if you wanna blur the background in bright sunlight).<p>You become a good fotographer if these interconnections are so well understood you don&#x27;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.<p>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.
评论 #33771429 未加载
评论 #33772337 未加载
muglug超过 2 年前
The main thing about photography is your first 10,000 photos will likely be bad. Modern technology makes it possible to get through 10,000 snaps much faster and much cheaper than when using film.<p>But taking those photos is not enough — it’s in the editing of those first 10,000 photos that you will find the hidden photographer in you.<p>Photography is a lot like writing code: you can create something that does the job, but does not do it beautifully. You can keep on creating until creating beauty becomes easier.
评论 #33770146 未加载
评论 #33772119 未加载
评论 #33769592 未加载
评论 #33770721 未加载
bambax超过 2 年前
Good advice and good writing. But the title is misleading: this is photography for aspiring photographers, not esp. geeks. I was expecting more geeky things.<p>For example, I have recently been toying with making a kind of photobooth &#x2F; selfies machine for parties by connecting a DSLR with a Raspberry Pi; people take pictures of themselves with a remote (the excellent Yongnuo RF-603 which is radio, not infrared); the Pi downloads the images (with gphoto2), resizes them, prints the date, and uploads to a server.<p>People can see their images on their phones less than a minute after it was taken. It&#x27;s a lot of fun.
评论 #33774208 未加载
post_break超过 2 年前
Somewhat related but if anyone is looking to get into photography Fuji is putting out digital cameras that emulate their film stocks. The results are pretty incredible. Also they have manual dials on the top so you&#x27;re not trying to program a computer to use it. It&#x27;s like driving a manual transmission vs an automatic.
评论 #33774968 未加载
评论 #33770032 未加载
qntty超过 2 年前
See also, Marc Levey (CS professor at Stanford specializing in computational photography) gave some good lectures at Google a few years ago on digital photography:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;sites.google.com&#x2F;site&#x2F;marclevoylectures&#x2F;home" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;sites.google.com&#x2F;site&#x2F;marclevoylectures&#x2F;home</a>
评论 #33770975 未加载
评论 #33769074 未加载
fedeb95超过 2 年前
All good advices. I&#x27;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&#x27; 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 time is not empty, but this has improved my craft.
评论 #33770724 未加载
pdpi超过 2 年前
Seeing as this is photography for <i>geeks</i>: Colour temperature is exactly that, a temperature.<p>Things glow when hot, with the colour of the light depending on the temperature and the material. When you say &quot;a colour temperature of 6200 K&quot; it means the light is the same colour as that emitted by an ideal black body at that temperature. It&#x27;s no coincidence we perceive colour temperatures around the high 5k to low 6k as white, because the surface of the sun is around 5800 K.
评论 #33771443 未加载
gmiller123456超过 2 年前
I&#x27;d be curious to know if any beginning photographer could actually put those tips to good use. I find it odd they did not cover adjusting exposure with ISO, shutter, and aperture. Getting the right exposure, and not blindly accepting auto-exposure, is probably the most fundamental skill to develop, and is usually where most teaching starts.<p>The example I use as to why auto-exposure is unreliable is that most manufacturers have auto-exposure adjust to produce 18% grey (there&#x27;s some variance in manufacturers). So if you take a picture of a white wall, the camera will expose it as 18% grey. If you take a picture of a black wall, the camera will expose it as 18% grey. As the photographer, it&#x27;s up to you to decide if you wanted the wall to be black, or show fine differences in shade, you can&#x27;t do both well at the same time.
评论 #33928516 未加载
nbzso超过 2 年前
Just sharing: If you want to learn photography, buy yourself a film camera and read those two books.<p>Ansel Adams:<p>The Camera <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;amzn.to&#x2F;3gMyCa5" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;amzn.to&#x2F;3gMyCa5</a><p>The Negative <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;amzn.to&#x2F;3U88fsN" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;amzn.to&#x2F;3U88fsN</a><p>The rest is just practice.:)
评论 #33770831 未加载
评论 #33771133 未加载
评论 #33774461 未加载
评论 #33770678 未加载
yieldcrv超过 2 年前
This is good, I would add that “made up composition rules” are instead “made up composition <i>guidelines</i>”, that people should learn how to deviate from after constricting themselves with false constraints
评论 #33770607 未加载
评论 #33771458 未加载
system2超过 2 年前
Adding examples makes it better than other sites I&#x27;ve seen. I will share this with friends. Thanks!
lxe超过 2 年前
This is helpful for my stable diffusion prompts.
评论 #33769480 未加载
评论 #33769170 未加载
photochemsyn超过 2 年前
An interesting site with lots of information about 35mm photography and film vs digital techniques is 35mmc.com. Here for example is a very clear and concise discussion of depth of field and the factors that control it (such as aperture, focal length):<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.35mmc.com&#x2F;25&#x2F;07&#x2F;2016&#x2F;basic-optics-photographers&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.35mmc.com&#x2F;25&#x2F;07&#x2F;2016&#x2F;basic-optics-photographers&#x2F;</a>
bambax超过 2 年前
Re: focus. Most cameras focus on shutter button half-pressed. Learn to use this by focusing first (with a half-press), framing, and then taking the picture by finishing the press (not doing a complete press again as that would reset the focus point).<p>Some cameras let you have a focus button different from the shutter button. This can be super useful and can become natural after a little while.
评论 #33775508 未加载
js-j超过 2 年前
If you want to understand exposure, look no further than Fred Parker&#x27;s Ultimate Exposure computer:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.reddit.com&#x2F;r&#x2F;AnalogCommunity&#x2F;comments&#x2F;t2bi0y&#x2F;fred_parkers_ultimate_exposure_computer&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.reddit.com&#x2F;r&#x2F;AnalogCommunity&#x2F;comments&#x2F;t2bi0y&#x2F;fre...</a>
WastingMyTime89超过 2 年前
Best pictures of the article: the first four.<p>Why are they the best: their composition is interesting with great use of vertical lines, background colors and well positioned windows.<p>First line of the core of the article: &quot;It is said that composition is the most important aspect of a photograph. I disagree.&quot;<p>Well, let&#x27;s agree to disagree then.
评论 #33773330 未加载
prego_xo超过 2 年前
As with any art form, it takes getting creative to make something amazing. It&#x27;s super helpful to know what each part of the camera does, but also what you can do in spite of them. One of the best lessons I learned in my high-school film class was that lighting is important, but never a limitation. The beginning of this article talks about avoiding&#x2F;using certain lights, but I would argue against the need of having the perfect circumstances for a photo. The combination of two flashlights in the dark or car sunshades in the sunlight are creative ways to make any camera take sharp photos with meaning.
camtarn超过 2 年前
Nitpick: &#x27;collimated&#x27; is a technical term for a beam of light where all the rays are <i>exactly</i> parallel. When using &#x27;collimated&#x27; in the article, the author means &#x27;focused&#x27; or &#x27;narrow&#x27; - as in, the focused beam of light emanating from a spotlight, which spreads out slower than an omnidirectional light, but isn&#x27;t strictly parallel.<p>You&#x27;d think that an article titled &#x27;Photography for geeks&#x27; would take some care to get the technical terms right!
skhr0680超过 2 年前
Pretty awesome overall, one improvement would be to shoot the model in the focal length shot face on to better illustrate the big nose, no ears (too wide) and pancake face (too tele) effects
thih9超过 2 年前
&gt; Telephoto optics tend to produce shallow DOF; wide-angle lenses keep almost everything in focus most of the time.<p>Isn’t this incorrect?<p>I.e. the article itself states that telephoto is just a crop of the wide angle. And sure, the background gets “larger” and if that changes the composition, it might make it look less busy. But the DOF (blur factor) stays the same.
agentdrtran超过 2 年前
I&#x27;ve been trying to learn more about photography recently and this is the best guide I&#x27;ve seen, especially the color and tone section.
nayuki超过 2 年前
Geekier with math: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.nayuki.io&#x2F;page&#x2F;the-photographic-exposure-equation" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.nayuki.io&#x2F;page&#x2F;the-photographic-exposure-equatio...</a>
davidmurdoch超过 2 年前
Great article. In case the author stops by: Why no mention of CRI? It&#x27;s definitely a great geeky topic, and the article links out to professional lights with exceptionally high CRI.
评论 #33928589 未加载
nippoo超过 2 年前
Unrelated to the content: I&#x27;m curious about the domain! It&#x27;s the first time I&#x27;ve come across a Christmas Island (.cx) domain since the infamous one back in the &#x27;00s.
ak_111超过 2 年前
Whats a good intro book to understand optics that is technical but doesn&#x27;t completely overwhelm (bonus if it includes how vision works from a physiological level)?
评论 #33771153 未加载
serko超过 2 年前
The author gave a nice general overview of the topic.<p>But the thing is, none of these technical things are essential.<p>Like a lot of people here (me included, but I am actively trying to get rid of it) the author has an engineering mindset, that was built (I am just guessing here) through years and years of engineering work.<p>And it is really cool and may give an advantage in some professions (and sometimes in life overall), but it is not the best approach to photography or in any other arty topic where one could not objectively measure pleasure and value, and where aesthetic perception is the main definition of something being excellent and desirable.<p>People often forget that photography is still mostly an art form. And in art, the most important aspect is provoking some kind of emotional response (folks mostly pursue pleasant ones, but it is not limited to that).<p>To understand lenses, focuses, and shutter speed how much time does one need? A couple of days? Weeks?<p>It is objectively easy to learn the rule of thirds, focal points, white balance, etc. But which white balance makes beautiful images? Which calculations would make your friends adore their faces in the photo? I have no answer to that, do you?<p>Should images be dark, moody, and sharp like Roger Dickens&#x27;s cinematography to be likable? Or dark, blurry, and saturated like Wong Kar-wai movies? Or they should be bright, light, and symmetrical like Wes Anderson&#x27;s fairytales?? Or grainy and geometrically precise like Henri Cartier-Bresson&#x27;s works? Or maybe images need to be provocative, erotically charged black-and-white photos, fashionable and borderline pornographic like Helmut Newton&#x27;s works?<p>There are a lot of cases then some person with a developed sense of beauty creates unimaginably stunning photography by using a smartphone build-in camera, but even more cases when someone with a pricey a-la Hasselblad, titan tripod, cinema-level lenses, 5-point professional lighting, and a long list of detailed photogear videoreviews making the most boring and forgettable images possible.<p>Feelings &gt; Any technical aspect, rules, or calculations<p>I am not saying that knowing your tools is not important at all, but it definitely less important than the internet wants it to be. For example, I know a Magnum agency photographer who takes all his photos with any digital SLR in auto mode (p-mode). And he adores Instagram.<p>So for any person who wants to start into photography (but not photography-related technology), I suggest watching a lot of photo books and cinematographically superior movies (all by critically acclaimed authors), visiting classical art museums, and for all costs avoiding any online photography communities.<p>And you should take as many photos as possible every day. Not only on vacations or holidays but just as a visual diary with colors that you found beautiful, unusual patterns that you start to see around, and unexpected shapes that things around us are forming.<p>Aesthetic goes first. It should be like a tingling feeling on the tips of your fingers when you see something interesting. Then from it go lighting, composition, and color. And these three are codependent.<p>You need to start seeing light, feeling colors, and thinking in shapes. Need to develop your sense of beauty and your watchfulness&#x2F;visual awareness&#x2F;contemplation (sorry, I don&#x27;t know how to translate this properly).<p>One cannot create beautiful photography if one does not know what beauty is.
评论 #33836208 未加载
spoils19超过 2 年前
What a great resource!
mod50ack超过 2 年前
I&#x27;ve been taking pictures for a few years now. Not all of my photos are fit for Wikimedia Commons, but I&#x27;ve put a lot on [1], especially of baseball players and buildings (just what I happen to enjoy photographing).<p>I began originally with point-and-shoots, which I borrowed from my parents and basically used as they&#x27;re designed: pointing and shooting. The quality of those early photos is not always great. But with time, I learned how to get a quality shot of a person or action (in baseball) and how to wait for the right moment and so on. This was without cheating (using burst mode). Of course, you don&#x27;t get 100% of the moments that are interesting. Sometimes someone blocks you, sometimes it just doesn&#x27;t happen at the right time, sometimes you&#x27;re eating a snack. It&#x27;s OK. The most important thing is to get a lot of practice taking pictures of the thing you like to photograph.<p>You might thing non-moving subjects are easier. They are in a way. But if you are photographing buildings, for instance, then you should care about straight lines and getting the right perspective. This can be infuriating if you know what to look for. People move, but at least we humans don&#x27;t have straight lines or flat surfaces and so it&#x27;s pretty easy to capture us from many different angles.<p>The point-and-shoots helped me develop my sense of timing. You don&#x27;t need to use a point-and-shoot for this, though; a better camera will be perfectly good (and give you better image quality). You can get a used DSLR for pretty cheap. The switch to interchangeable-lens cameras (DSLRs, which are a bit older, or mirrorless cameras, which are newer) will give you the opportunity to try out different lenses, which make a huge difference for your photography. (By the way, DSLR lenses can generally be used on newer mirrorless cameras.) My first photography-changing DSLR lens was a Canon 70-300, which made my baseball photography much more credible. You don&#x27;t need to practice to use a new lens, of course. But if you practice using some, then you can gain a better understanding of the importance of focal length (and aperture) to your ptohography.<p>The next step is getting out of auto mode and getting a full understanding of manual exposure and RAW. For me, for a long time, I shot mostly in a program mode on my DSLR because I only saw through the optical viewfinder and wanted my exposure to be right, especially as I was shooting JPEG on small SD cards. That&#x27;s all very well. But to get to the level I am at now, I needed to start shooting in full manual (the mode I now use 99% of the time), and shooting in my camera&#x27;s RAW format (which gives you MUCH more editing latitude in basically every way, as well as the full quality of your camera).<p>Using a contemporary mirrorless camera can actually make manual exposure significantly easier. You can now see your exposure in your viewfinder (generally this can be turned off, too). (On DSLRs from the last ~ten years, you can get this same feature by using live view --- i.e., shooting with the back screen rather than the viewfinder.) This can confirm your exposure visually and also get you more familiar with the different settings and how to &quot;eyeball&quot; it even on a DSLR&#x2F;without exposure simulation in the viewfinder.<p>At every step, practice is key. If you want to take pictures, go out and do it. It doesn&#x27;t matter if they&#x27;re bad. They will not all be good, especially not at the beginning. Find the things you like to photograph and keep at it until you are happy with what you&#x27;re doing. (Or, if you find you don&#x27;t like photography, that&#x27;s OK, too.)<p>[1] Shameless plug: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;commons.wikimedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Special:MediaSearch?type=image&amp;search=Q113531294&amp;sort=recency" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;commons.wikimedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Special:MediaSearch?type=...</a>
评论 #33797141 未加载
vanillax超过 2 年前
Love it!