November 21, 2024, 01:41:45 PM
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Pages1
1
Shutterbug Club / Re: Improvements to my photography setup?
April 02, 2010, 08:04:53 PM
Thanks! I'm so used to looking at this thing, I didn't realize how unintelligible the drawing might look to someone else. The box is 30in by 30in. The thing on the right is a lamp tipped on its side, propped on a stack of books, on top of a small side table, with tinfoil for a lamp shade to reflect the light. I don't know if I could use it to catch ghosts so much as to accidentally catch my house on fire.
The size thing is a good suggestion. I hadn't thought of that. I'll lop off some of the foam core and make it smaller. The cloth shouldn't be too hard to come by, like you were suggesting.
I was using a room in the house that has a lot of windows and wood floors and such, so that might have been what was creating the red glow even though none of those things are particularly red. I'm not really sure. But, I'll move it somewhere else. I'll go out and price some clamp lamps, but the other thought I had is that one of the standing lamps (Although I didn't draw it this way), has one of those joint arms right below the section with the bulb. You know what I'm talking about? Maybe if I clamped my 60 Watt somewhere on the lamp and shined them both from above (pretty much from the same place), it would sort of simulate the effect of having an actual good light up there. But I'll look at some clamp lamps.
Anyway, thanks for your suggestions!
The size thing is a good suggestion. I hadn't thought of that. I'll lop off some of the foam core and make it smaller. The cloth shouldn't be too hard to come by, like you were suggesting.
I was using a room in the house that has a lot of windows and wood floors and such, so that might have been what was creating the red glow even though none of those things are particularly red. I'm not really sure. But, I'll move it somewhere else. I'll go out and price some clamp lamps, but the other thought I had is that one of the standing lamps (Although I didn't draw it this way), has one of those joint arms right below the section with the bulb. You know what I'm talking about? Maybe if I clamped my 60 Watt somewhere on the lamp and shined them both from above (pretty much from the same place), it would sort of simulate the effect of having an actual good light up there. But I'll look at some clamp lamps.
Anyway, thanks for your suggestions!
2
Shutterbug Club / Improvements to my photography setup?
April 02, 2010, 06:36:25 PM
Unfortunately, the room I usually use to set up the light box is in use tonight, so I decided, rather than carry this stuff all over the house, it would just be easier to draw it:
[attachment=0:1tkm13az]Photography Setup.jpg[/attachment:1tkm13az]
I have 4 lamps (2 table, 2 standing), each with a 50-100-150 Watt GE Reveal bulb set to 150. The light is focused toward the box with tinfoil. I have the camera on a tripod in front of the box, which is constructed from Foam Core with a sheet of white paper draped over it to eliminate the crease.
I went looking for a clip-on lamp such as you recommended, but all I could find is a small 60 Watt one in the basement. I do have some 60 Watt GE Reveal bulbs, though, so I could add that in somewhere. What else can I do to improve it for the upcoming reshoot?
[attachment=0:1tkm13az]Photography Setup.jpg[/attachment:1tkm13az]
I have 4 lamps (2 table, 2 standing), each with a 50-100-150 Watt GE Reveal bulb set to 150. The light is focused toward the box with tinfoil. I have the camera on a tripod in front of the box, which is constructed from Foam Core with a sheet of white paper draped over it to eliminate the crease.
I went looking for a clip-on lamp such as you recommended, but all I could find is a small 60 Watt one in the basement. I do have some 60 Watt GE Reveal bulbs, though, so I could add that in somewhere. What else can I do to improve it for the upcoming reshoot?
3
Help Us Build the Database / Re: the Backside
March 28, 2010, 05:13:36 PM
Thanks so much! Here are some samples:
When I try and mess with the contrast and brightness, the objects just disappear.
When I try and mess with the contrast and brightness, the objects just disappear.
4
Help Us Build the Database / Re: the Backside
March 28, 2010, 04:20:56 PM
No problem. Being a Transformers nerd makes this more fun than work. So, here's 1500 at quality 7:
http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/1q ... directlink
btw, if I may ask, do you have any tips for shooting all-white pieces like G1 Jazz and Prowl or Sideswipe's missiles? No matter what I do the pictures come back kind of dim. I'm working with a home-made light box, with four 150 Watt GE reveal bulbs pointed at it (admittedly, sort of haphazardly directed with tinfoil: two on the sides pointing inward, two on the top, pointing in and down). I have the ISO set to 100, exposure set to 1+, white balance set to Tungsten, Macro mode on and every other setting that I can find mentioned on the tutorial or buried in older threads in here. All I have left to shoot of the things I could find that I could contribute is just a few white pieces. Of course, after I figure out how to get this better, I'm sure a lot of my previous photos will have problems, so I'll have to go back and do another reshoot, but whatever. At the moment, these white accessories are driving me crazy.
http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/1q ... directlink
btw, if I may ask, do you have any tips for shooting all-white pieces like G1 Jazz and Prowl or Sideswipe's missiles? No matter what I do the pictures come back kind of dim. I'm working with a home-made light box, with four 150 Watt GE reveal bulbs pointed at it (admittedly, sort of haphazardly directed with tinfoil: two on the sides pointing inward, two on the top, pointing in and down). I have the ISO set to 100, exposure set to 1+, white balance set to Tungsten, Macro mode on and every other setting that I can find mentioned on the tutorial or buried in older threads in here. All I have left to shoot of the things I could find that I could contribute is just a few white pieces. Of course, after I figure out how to get this better, I'm sure a lot of my previous photos will have problems, so I'll have to go back and do another reshoot, but whatever. At the moment, these white accessories are driving me crazy.
5
Help Us Build the Database / Re: the Backside
March 28, 2010, 03:25:28 PM
That allows me to save it at 9, which gives us this:
http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/i- ... directlink
Looks pretty legible on my end, I think.
http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/i- ... directlink
Looks pretty legible on my end, I think.
6
Help Us Build the Database / Re: the Backside
March 27, 2010, 11:44:32 AM
The next bump up to 8 puts the pic at 312 kb:
http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/-q ... directlink
9=380 kb
10=490
11=668
12=935
http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/-q ... directlink
9=380 kb
10=490
11=668
12=935
7
Help Us Build the Database / Re: the Backside
March 27, 2010, 09:31:19 AM
Sure! Here you go:
http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/9p ... directlink
http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/9p ... directlink
8
Help Us Build the Database / Re: the Backside
March 27, 2010, 07:15:03 AM
To get it down that low, I have to save at it quality 7, but I think its still readable. I guess that's the magic number!
9
Help Us Build the Database / Re: the Backside
March 26, 2010, 11:46:24 PM
Ooh. I tried to upload them directly, but it says the max file size is 256 KiB, so I'll try them on Picasa:
http://picasaweb.google.com/11021014173 ... directlink
You'll have to download them individually from the album to see them full sized.
http://picasaweb.google.com/11021014173 ... directlink
You'll have to download them individually from the album to see them full sized.
10
Help Us Build the Database / Re: the Backside
March 26, 2010, 10:37:38 PM
Thanks for the quick reply and the pointers!
Okay, so, if I may break this down and find the right size. Here is the undoctored (crop) of the original photo at full resolution:
http://i967.photobucket.com/albums/ae160/sppower/AirazorUndoctoredCropofPhoto.jpg
I agree with you, I think the colors are a little too pale. Reminds of the way Hot Rod looks on some of the '86 Movie DVDs.
Okay, here's the same crop, same resolution, but with the contrast +17, brightness +5, I think it was, and hue +7 or so.
http://i967.photobucket.com/albums/ae160/sppower/AirazorFixedFullResolution.jpg
Colorwise, I think it looks much closer to the box that's sitting in front of me.
Alright, so here's 1200:
http://i967.photobucket.com/albums/ae160/sppower/Airazor1200.jpg
I had to save it at Quality 7 to keep the file size down.
And again at Quality 10:
http://i967.photobucket.com/albums/ae160/sppower/Airazor12002.jpg
Just for a few options, here's 1400:
http://i967.photobucket.com/albums/ae160/sppower/Airazor1400.jpg
It's saved at Quality 9, as once I got up to these dimensions, I didn't want to sacrifice too much to keep the file size down. I'll just keep saving at 9 from here on out.
Here's 1600:
http://i967.photobucket.com/albums/ae160/sppower/Airazor1600.jpg
This seems pretty readable to me, but it might be a little big for what you're looking for.
Okay, so, if I may break this down and find the right size. Here is the undoctored (crop) of the original photo at full resolution:
http://i967.photobucket.com/albums/ae160/sppower/AirazorUndoctoredCropofPhoto.jpg
I agree with you, I think the colors are a little too pale. Reminds of the way Hot Rod looks on some of the '86 Movie DVDs.
Okay, here's the same crop, same resolution, but with the contrast +17, brightness +5, I think it was, and hue +7 or so.
http://i967.photobucket.com/albums/ae160/sppower/AirazorFixedFullResolution.jpg
Colorwise, I think it looks much closer to the box that's sitting in front of me.
Alright, so here's 1200:
http://i967.photobucket.com/albums/ae160/sppower/Airazor1200.jpg
I had to save it at Quality 7 to keep the file size down.
And again at Quality 10:
http://i967.photobucket.com/albums/ae160/sppower/Airazor12002.jpg
Just for a few options, here's 1400:
http://i967.photobucket.com/albums/ae160/sppower/Airazor1400.jpg
It's saved at Quality 9, as once I got up to these dimensions, I didn't want to sacrifice too much to keep the file size down. I'll just keep saving at 9 from here on out.
Here's 1600:
http://i967.photobucket.com/albums/ae160/sppower/Airazor1600.jpg
This seems pretty readable to me, but it might be a little big for what you're looking for.
11
Help Us Build the Database / Re: the Backside
March 26, 2010, 08:18:00 PM
I have a question about the readability of package back photos. I'm working with Airazor's box right now. I have cropped the photo so that it is 1553 x 2569 and all of the text, down to the tech spec, instructions, and quality guarantee is perfectly readable. When I resize it to 605 x 1000, it looks like this:
http://i967.photobucket.com/albums/ae160/sppower/AirazorPackageBack.jpg
Is this acceptable readability?
http://i967.photobucket.com/albums/ae160/sppower/AirazorPackageBack.jpg
Is this acceptable readability?
12
Shutterbug Club / Re: Back of Package guidelines
March 24, 2010, 02:55:39 PM
Awesome! Now I can contribute more.
Okay, this may not fit with the thread title, but here's another photo question. It concerns interchangeable parts. I read the bit in the photo guide where you mentioned that if the database entry is for the US version of a toy, than you can't substitute the Takara version. That makes sense. What about, though, for instance, all of the US G2 Constructicons coming with the exact same Devastator Instructions Booklet? As far as I can tell, there is no appreciable difference between the one that would have been packaged with Scrapper or the one that came with Scavenger. Now, I happen to have all of them, but not all of their Devastator Instruction Pamphlets have survived. One of two of them seem to be in good shape, though. Can I just use one copy for all six of them? Would that count for the full six photo's worth of points? Beyond even that, do I need to take six separate photos of the same pamphlet? Now, on top of this, there are twelve G2 Constructicons, if you count the orange and yellow versions, who all came with the same Devastator Instruction booklet. How would you handle and/or score this situation?
Edit: Hmm. . . As I'm examining the photo submission page, it looks like it would distribute the one photo to all 12 pages automatically. I'm still curious exactly how this would work out, though.
Okay, this may not fit with the thread title, but here's another photo question. It concerns interchangeable parts. I read the bit in the photo guide where you mentioned that if the database entry is for the US version of a toy, than you can't substitute the Takara version. That makes sense. What about, though, for instance, all of the US G2 Constructicons coming with the exact same Devastator Instructions Booklet? As far as I can tell, there is no appreciable difference between the one that would have been packaged with Scrapper or the one that came with Scavenger. Now, I happen to have all of them, but not all of their Devastator Instruction Pamphlets have survived. One of two of them seem to be in good shape, though. Can I just use one copy for all six of them? Would that count for the full six photo's worth of points? Beyond even that, do I need to take six separate photos of the same pamphlet? Now, on top of this, there are twelve G2 Constructicons, if you count the orange and yellow versions, who all came with the same Devastator Instruction booklet. How would you handle and/or score this situation?
Edit: Hmm. . . As I'm examining the photo submission page, it looks like it would distribute the one photo to all 12 pages automatically. I'm still curious exactly how this would work out, though.
13
Shutterbug Club / Back of Package guidelines
March 22, 2010, 11:44:06 AM
When I was a litt'lun back in the days of Generation 2, a wise old elder told me that even if I was going to play with my toys (which, of course, I did), I should save the boxes as they might come in handy one day. My question is, for photo-submitting purposes, how "sealed" do these figures have to be? I understand why you wouldn't want to use, say, an open G2 Combaticon or something, since you can see the bubble from the back just as much as from the front, but if I still have my old boxes, and they're in good shape, do they still have to be sealed? Some things, like beast wars boxes (and maybe cards, I think, too) leave the viewer absolutely no clue as to whether or not they are open when viewing them only from the back. The bubble and/or window is only visible from the front. If, in reality, the box is open, but there would be no way to tell in a photo of the back, is it still okay to submit?
Pages1