Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Go Back   Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community > Main Forums > The Off Topic Forum > Tech Talk
Register Forum Rules FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 02-25-2011, 08:56 AM   #1
Buzzard
First Line Centre
 
Buzzard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Exp:
Default Photography Question

Can any experts tell me what might be causing the spots that you see in this picture? Every once in a while they show up for no obvious reason. I cant find any pictures where it's happened in daylight outdoors. Seems like it's limited to pics using flash, although I can't positively confirm that. My wife says they're orbs?! The camera is a Panasonic DMC-TZ5 if that is any help.

Thanks for any help.

Buzzard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2011, 09:25 AM   #2
Regulator75
Franchise Player
 
Regulator75's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Behind Nikkor Glass
Exp:
Default

Your wife is partially right. They are optic orbs, not the paranormal kind.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orb_(optics)

Quote:
Orb artifacts are captured during low-light instances where the camera's flash is used, such as at night or underwater. The artifacts are especially common with compact or ultra-compact cameras, where the short distance between the lens and the built-in flash decreases the angle of light reflection to the lens, directly illuminating the aspect of the particles facing the lens and increasing the camera's ability to capture the light reflected off normally sub-visible particles.
__________________

More photos on Flickr
Regulator75 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Regulator75 For This Useful Post:
Old 02-25-2011, 09:28 AM   #3
Buzzard
First Line Centre
 
Buzzard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Exp:
Default

Thanks Regulator.

Can anything be done about it....short of buying a better camera?
Buzzard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2011, 09:33 AM   #4
Regulator75
Franchise Player
 
Regulator75's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Behind Nikkor Glass
Exp:
Default

Most compact cameras are prone to this. It doesn't happen every time, so try taking a couple shots instead of just one.
__________________

More photos on Flickr
Regulator75 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Regulator75 For This Useful Post:
Old 02-25-2011, 01:18 PM   #5
Save Us Sutter
I'll get you next time Gadget!
 
Save Us Sutter's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Exp:
Default

Hmm, I was just going to tell you it was snowing.

Learn something new every day.
__________________

Save Us Sutter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2011, 01:42 PM   #6
firebug
Powerplay Quarterback
 
firebug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Mayor of McKenzie Towne
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Buzzard View Post
Thanks Regulator.

Can anything be done about it....short of buying a better camera?
Caused by a wide open lens (aperture) and a flash that is located close to the center of the lens.

In a compact camera not much you can do other than avoid these types of low-light situations.

Moving to an off-camera flash or using a tripod and a resulting longer shutter speed (smaller aperture) would also reduce this.
__________________
"Teach a man to reason, and he'll think for a lifetime"

~P^2
firebug is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to firebug For This Useful Post:
Old 02-25-2011, 01:43 PM   #7
Jimmy Stang
Franchise Player
 
Jimmy Stang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Buzzard View Post
Can anything be done about it....short of buying a better camera?
Not much, unfortunately. Getting the lens farther from the flash is the key, and when you've got a fixed lens and a fixed flash, it obviously isn't going to happen. Keep in mind that even the best point and shoot cameras will be prone to this, so don't lose any sleep over it.
Jimmy Stang is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Jimmy Stang For This Useful Post:
Old 02-25-2011, 01:44 PM   #8
Jimmy Stang
Franchise Player
 
Jimmy Stang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

And what's with the flip-flops?
Jimmy Stang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2011, 09:03 PM   #9
Buzzard
First Line Centre
 
Buzzard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Exp:
Default

Thanks for help guys.

Yeah, ya know, it's not an expensive camera by any means, but its only a couple years old, and was kind of pickin' me that this was happening. Now that i know its a common thing I don't feel too bad.

I was just dusting it off today for a vacation starting tomorrow. Land of flip flops and optical orbs....here we come!
Buzzard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2025, 10:35 PM   #10
Delthefunky
First Line Centre
 
Delthefunky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Vernon, BC
Exp:
Default

Major bump!

I've taken to photography lately, not as a career, just as an artful expression. I'm interested in being "honest" in it, and using mainly the exposure and lense to compose the photo. I didn't really fully understand until recently however, how much digital cameras may enhance photos themselves without any other input, through colour profiles etc, but then I figure films do that too, Kodachrome, Fujifilm, etc each has their own subtleties. I could just choose a flat or neutral profile, but that often makes the picture less than what you saw. Then I learned it's pretty common to shoot flat or neutral raw files and tweak then to how you see fit, which I'm not against, but at some point it becomes an unbelievable image.

I realize it's a matter of opinion, and there's no right or wrong answer. Just wondering what different people think.
Delthefunky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2025, 11:21 PM   #11
Fuzz
Franchise Player
 
Fuzz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Pickle Jar Lake
Exp:
Default

Film photography involved choices like film down to brand and type, B&W, slide...and that's without involving using a dark room where you have all the choices incorporated into digital dark rooms(and a lot more). Ultimately photography is an art and you make the choices as an artist. If you choose to overdo the sliders, that's your choice. I usually try to recreate what I see, which is never what the camera sees. But sometimes it's fun to take a photo from real to surreal. It's all fine. It's not like you'll end up making dubstep or something.
Fuzz is online now   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Fuzz For This Useful Post:
Old 12-09-2025, 11:30 PM   #12
DownInFlames
Craig McTavish' Merkin
 
DownInFlames's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Delthefunky View Post
Major bump!

I've taken to photography lately, not as a career, just as an artful expression. I'm interested in being "honest" in it, and using mainly the exposure and lense to compose the photo. I didn't really fully understand until recently however, how much digital cameras may enhance photos themselves without any other input, through colour profiles etc, but then I figure films do that too, Kodachrome, Fujifilm, etc each has their own subtleties. I could just choose a flat or neutral profile, but that often makes the picture less than what you saw. Then I learned it's pretty common to shoot flat or neutral raw files and tweak then to how you see fit, which I'm not against, but at some point it becomes an unbelievable image.

I realize it's a matter of opinion, and there's no right or wrong answer. Just wondering what different people think.

Ever seen an Ansel Adams photo? Those scenes definitely didn't look like that in real life.


Unless you're shooting for a news publication reality doesn't really matter. It's your art so shoot however you want.
DownInFlames is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2025, 12:12 AM   #13
TrentCrimmIndependent
Franchise Player
 
TrentCrimmIndependent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2021
Location: Richmond upon Thames, London
Exp:
Default

nm

Last edited by TrentCrimmIndependent; 12-10-2025 at 12:42 AM.
TrentCrimmIndependent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2025, 09:52 AM   #14
Firebot
#1 Goaltender
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Delthefunky View Post
I realize it's a matter of opinion, and there's no right or wrong answer. Just wondering what different people think.
Photography is an art form. If your goal is to recreate the images as close to reality as possible, that is your prerogative. If you want to express your vision you can as well.

In the end you are using an imperfect tool to mimic what the eye sees and will subtly differ from what you see (whether film or digital) and you are doing an artist's interpretation to get as close to 'natural' as you want. Lens focal length, depth of field, colour saturation, ISO (light sensitivity) photo film and turning into what your eyes may see are all interpretations.

For instance a camera is much more receptive to northern lights than you can see with your eyes. To get it 'right' you would need to heavily desaturate the photos which is photo manipulation.

https://ewenbell.com/blog/Why_Aurora..._on_The_Camera

You may find as you develop your love for photography that you get bored of everything looking the same and delve into HDR hell. Just shoot however you want.
Firebot is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:18 AM.

Calgary Flames
2024-25




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Calgarypuck 2021 | See Our Privacy Policy