Digital cameras

The thing you should be looking for is not so much how many megapixels the camera can claim but rather how close can it focus, and how small can the lens aperture get down to. The megapixels basically determine how large of a print can be produced with acceptable results ( the 2.1 mp is good to up to 4x6, the 3.2 mp up to 5x7, the 4 mp up to 8x10, etc.). The critical factor in your question is how sharp of an image can you get from a camera... for digital camera this is determined by the sharpness of the lens, the ability to focus, the ability of the CCD (charge couple device, the "film" of the digital camera) to resolve the image, the embedded software, etc. I would look to getting a medium size (3.2 to 5 mp) camera with the best glass and software; which means Canon, Nikon, Panasonic, etc. The second thing I would pay attention to is the ability to control the speed and aperture. The aperture is critical for sharpness because the smaller the opening of the lens to admit light (the f stop), the tighter the focus, everything else being equal. Shooting at a small aperture means the shutter has to stay open longer, which brings me to the best single item for improving model photos... a good tripod.  The tripod holds the camera steady, which is absolutely critical for getting the maximum sharpness for this type of photography.

To sum up; look for a digital camera that allows you to have some control over the speed and aperture, can focus close enough to be useful, and is comfortable to handle and use. Plunk it on a tripod, get a couple of lamps (even clamp lamps from a DIY store), and you should be good to go. One thing I really like about digital photography is that I can take dozens of shots if  I want to, keep one or two that I like, and delete the rest, over and over for basically the cost of the camera and batteries (I recommend getting a camera that uses AA's and using rechargeables).

Something you might wanna look into on your current camera is it's ability to do macro shots.  Check in your manual.  The icon for it usually looks like a flower.  This will allow you to take a picture about 6 inches from the subject.  I have a 2.0 megapixel camera and it works great for me.

Jesse 

Jim,
Thank you very much for the advice.  Now I know exactly what to look for when I get a new camera. 

Jesse,
Your tip worked very well with the camera.  I always wondered what that flower meant, hehe.  Heres another picture with the same camera, this time with macro set to on:



I huge improvement!


Thank you Both!

Another thing you can check for with you current camera, or shopping for the new one...

See if you can change the resolution (size) in which the camera takes (saves) the pictures.

My old Sony has different settings, but I found the highest setting (largest picture size) to give me the best/clearest results in my images. For some reason, the small resolution sizes always comes out fuzzy. If I need to make the image smaller, I do it in Photoshop and not the camera.

A couple of quick basics in any kind of photography.  Higher F-stop…more depth of filed which is the “in focus” distance from nearest to farthest.  The closer you focus, whether in macro mode or not will decrease depth of field.

 

The higher the mega pixels in a digital camers = higher resolution.  Resolution being the ability to distinguish between to points.  A shot of a tree without leaves at lo-res will show fewer if the little in between branches than a hi-res shot from the same distance.  The higher MP’s will yield a larger picture of the same scene.  On my camera a shot at 1MP is a photo 13x17 inches and a 5MP is 36x27 inches and both cover the exact same area… the flied of view is the same.  The large picture has much more detail due to the hi-res/size. 

 

A 2mp camera should yield a pic for the forum that is just fine from a full view.  Your quality may be affected by the optics of your camera.  If you get a new camera with higher MP’s it is sometimes easier and better to take a pic of something small, like a cockpit tub, from an average distance but with the res cranked all the way up… then crop the pic with a photo editor and cut an 8x10 photo out of the 27x36 “poster” size pic.

 

A word about storage.  Depending on subject matter... a 5MP pic can be in the range of 2 mega bytes.  They can fill up hard drives and can affect overall perfomance if they take up too much space.

 

 

This is a 1/48 cockpit taken at 5mp form about 2 feet so it was somewhat small in the overall photo.  But the hi res kept it sharp and I cut out the final pic form the big one.

 

the second shot is good

so you don't need a new camera now

  good save money for a bit longer

I agree.  That 2nd shot is a big improvement but it looks like you used the camera's flash because your subject is washed out.  Play around with your lighting and use a tripod.  As mentioned you can pick up a couple of those clamp type lights from a DIY store.  You can use a white sheet, white plastic trash bag, etc... anything that is translucent and let light thru.  The idea is to soften the light so you don't get harsh shadows.  You can use one light as your main light and then a second light as your fill light.  Some people use 3 lights.  The cool thing about digital camera's is you get to see immediately how different changes in lighting effect your subject.  If your using incandescent lights and trash bags just keep an eye on them so you don't melt em

Also you can pick up art paper from your local grocery store and use that as your slip or backdrop.  Some people use carpet or cloth.  And some people setup backgrounds that make it look like the shot was taken outdoors in the woods or something. 

I have a little Olympus 1.3 megapixel PnS that does pretty well considering and a Minolta Maxxum 7 SLR.  I love the Maxxum 7 but I'm really thinking about switching over to a digital SLR. 

I have taped layers of papertowel over the flash on my digtal camera to reduce the intensity of the flash in some close in shots with pretty good success.  Like kumy said... nice to be able to see the results right away.

Also try bouncing the lights off of a white surface, such as poster board.  This will also give you a more even, difuse light.  The Reveal brand light bulbs by GE seem to give pretty good results for home applications.  Get two or three cheap clamp on lamp holders at the hardware store and you are set for lighting.  Consider getting a cheap tripod, or use a towel to brace the camera while shooting - this will allow you to get much better results too.

Kurt

 

The best cheap source for non-heat producing photo work indoors are 5000K color temperature, natural daylight fluorescents. You can get them as short as 18" tubes or in the screw socket styles. With Portra NC-160 film they give good color rendition and they work just as well with a digital (provided your white balance is set correctly).

Thats a good suggestion for me since I"m still shootin film.

these guys are right

and the bottom line is if your gonna get a new one

a real good 3-3.2 megpix cam with the proper features will be better than buying a 5-6 megpix  elcheapo

Just thought I would chime in since I just purchased a new camera.  I picked up an Olympus SP-500 UZ from Circuit City for about 350$.  It is a bit of cash, but its also not a simple point and shoot camera.  Its a superzoom that is more like something you would find in a studio.

http://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg_section/product.asp?product=1189

I purchased it to make some pics of my miniatures and because I am about to start some modeling again and wanted to be able to post stuff on my website without problems.  The camera lets you have complete manual control over the focus, arperture, and exposure time.  Not to mention the super macro mode that can focus on something 3mm from the lens. 

http://www.eberkain.com/miniatures.html

I would agree with the other posters saying that manual focus is about the most important feature for photographing small stuff.

Ok, I have a question.  With reference to F-stop and stuff, what is a good setting?  I have a Canon Powershot A-80 4 megapixel.  I played a little with it the other night and on once setting I could change a setting that was at default F-4.  I obviously need to read the manual, but perhaps this is the F-Stop?  I could go up or down with it.  Another setting was default at 1/125.  I don't know what that setting was, be perhaps the appeture?  Either way, what is a ballpark setting to get the best picture without having one area or another out of focus.

Dave

Aperture and F-stop is the same thing.  The aperture is the actual mechanism that opens and closes controlling the amount of light that passes through the lens.  The f-stop is a numerical representation of the size of the opening.    The higher the "f" number, the smaller the "aperture" opening... the greater the depth of field... the area in focus front to back.  The 1/125 is the shutter speed.  The shutter remains open for 1/125 of a second.

 

Raising or lower the f-stop will half or double the amount of light coming in the lens.  Raising or lowering the shutter speed once step will also half or double the amount of light coming in.  So a correct exposure of 1/125 at f5.6 is the same exposure as 1/60 at f8… the second one letting twice as much light from the slower shutter speed but half as much form the smaller lens opening or aperture.  Net is the same exposure. 

 

A far as a good setting… you need to let the camera's meter do that for you as there really isn’t a standard setting but you want to have as much depth of field as possible.  This months FSM has a very good article about using digital cameras for model pics.

 

 

Ok, that makes sense.  Now, is there an ideal setting for taking pictures then?  When I was taking some photos last night on auto, I switched modes and saw that it was using F-4 and 1/125.  How low do I want to go?  Or is this something that completely depends on the conditions and it's a trial and error thing? 

Dave

Sorry Dave… I did an edit I think while your were posting so that last section may not have been there.  You generally don’t want the hand hold a camera with a shutter speeds lower than 1/60… or 1/25 when doing close ups.  When you think you have the concept described above down pat… add this to the mix:

 

The closer you focus, as in the closer your camera gets to the subject… will DECREASE depth of field.  Zooming in, in essence using a telephoto lens, will DECREASE depth of field.  So as you can imagine a lot of what you are trying to shoot is trying to give you the least depth of field.  Go for max depth of field with the highest f-stop you can get on your camera.  As long as you have a tripod to hold the camera you won’t have to worry about the shutter speed since even if due to low light the shutter speed need to a real long like a1/2 of a full second it doesn’t matter since the tripod will hold the camera rock steady.  As long as you and your girl friend or wife are not slam dancing while you take the pics.

Don't forget to check out the article Mark Thompsom wrote for the May issue of FSM about using digital photography for your models. He offers lots of suggestions and ideas. It's posted on the Web site, along with some bonus lighting techniques. Just click in the "Articles" tab on the top of the page to check it out.

I'm re-reading the article now.  I had to wait until I got home from work.  I didn't realize the article was on the net also.  The article is great and provides a lot of info on taking better pictures using light and things.  However, the article still doesn't quite explain how to change a lot of these settings and what you want to try or start with.  I guess the article is still geared towards people that have a slight understanding of cameras or at least people who actually took the time to read the directions.  [blush] 

It does say that you want to go with the highest F-stop.  My camera's highest F-stop is 8.  But what about the shutter speed?  I have no idea where to start.  I tried it with a 1 second setting.  I'm not quite sure how to synch my flash.  I guess I'll have to dig in the directions for that one.  I took a few photos from close up with and without a flash.  I got pretty darn good field of depth from about the middle all the way to the back.  However, the closest things were still blurry. 



Then I tried with a flash.



Then I tried using the flower setting for close ups.  It seemed to give a much better focus close and didn't completely lose the detail far out.



It seemed to me that the flash was causing too much of a flood of light.  So I tried without the flash.  Maybe I can get this same effect with a faster shutter speed and a flash, but this seemed ok.



Tell me what you think, or what improvements I should try and make in the camera settings.  I need to buy another light and buy a tripod or make something to put my camera on.  I had to use a stool, hense the low angle of the picture.  :)