Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

So I finally have 2000 points of my Infernus Chapter complete. I've been trying to get a decent army photo, but I guess I'm just not knowledgeable enough about working my camera. I'm sure there are some awesome mini photographers lurking about here, so I'm hoping someone has some help to offer.

It is three tanks, 20 models on 25mm bases, and 42 models on 40mm bases. I can fit them in roughly an 18x16 inch footprint without it looking to overcrowded. The camera I have is a Sony DSC-F828. I have set my aperture to 8 in an attempt to get the whole army in focus, but it isn't cutting it.

Any help people can give on getting an army shot fully in focus without taking multiple photos of various sections and photoshopping them together?

Thanks!

Pick a corner of your house , with the wall as the back ground. Shine a few lights or lamps , infront of the army ( i cant stress this enough )

Find a little raised platform ( chair , stool? ) and voila take the pic

Maybe I wasn't specific enough. I have a photo area that works great for me for single or small groups of models. White curved background, multiple lights to ensure adequate and even lighting, etc.

What I am having difficulty with is getting the entire picture in detail and in focus for a large number of models. If I am aiming at the center of the army, the models at the outer edges are out of focus. Is there anything that can help with this besides the aperture setting?

Try a couple of second delay. This works wonders for me as I have a mediocre++ camera. I put it on a two second delay, autofocus and press, focus stays, the vibration from my button punch settles in the two seconds and I end up with a pretty decent photo. Also, I take images in many different settings and I get my usual best results with the weirdest settings (usually TEXT setting). Anyway, this is what I do to get my camera to work. My images are not the best but better than most on here. Check my gallery and see if that is more what you are looking for.

Of course it may be your lens is just not right for the image you are trying to take. I assume you have tried a landscape setting? Or variations of Macro?

I hope it helps.

It's very difficult to get the whole army in focus and the unfortunate thing is f/8 is probably the highest the camera will be able to go. If you have access to photoshop and a tripod you could attempt to do a composite image of the entire army. I highly suggest shooting in RAW format.

The problem with the f828 is the sensor is actually quite large for a prosumer camera. The bigger the sensor, the harder it is to keep everything in focus even at f/16 and higher. I have a full frame slr (sensor is the same size as 35mm film) and at f/22 I still can't get my whole army in focus. Small consumer cameras are actually ideal for miniature photography because they have tiny sensors which make it much easier to have almost everything in focus. Image quality overall might not be as high, but the aesthetic of being able to see everything in focus is more important in most cases.

http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/key=sensor%20sizes some good info on sensor sizes

I can get my entire army in focus in pictures, but I use a DSLR and have a set of lenses that goes up f1.2, and down to f32, a selection of tripods and cable releases to ensure a shake-free shot.

Depth of field at f8 isn't particularly good.
f22 is often better, but as this will have an effect on your shutter speeds, a tripod IS ESSENTIAL (or some other way of stabilising the camera. Self timer is also a nice trick to use to eliminate camera shake if you don't have a cable release.

I'm gonna have to try the delay thing. My pics are always blotchy...just take a look at my gallery and you will see what I mean.

Thanks for the tips so far. One thing I did notice was I was set to Continuous AF instead of Monitoring or Single. Continuous AF forces the AF range finder to Center AF. Changing to Monitoring let me switch the AF range finder to Multipoint AF, that made a huge difference.

This is Multipoint AF with aperature open to it's widest (2.8 I think), with the most even lighting I could manage against a white base and backdrop. Not perfect, but not bad. I'm not sure what else I can do with this camera to improve the shot further.

What kind of camera did you use?

Kaaihn wrote:Thanks for the tips so far. One thing I did notice was I was set to Continuous AF instead of Monitoring or Single. Continuous AF forces the AF range finder to Center AF. Changing to Monitoring let me switch the AF range finder to Multipoint AF, that made a huge difference.

This is Multipoint AF with aperature open to it's widest (2.8 I think), with the most even lighting I could manage against a white base and backdrop. Not perfect, but not bad. I'm not sure what else I can do with this camera to improve the shot further.

Nahh that was at f/8 not f/2.8, but it looks really good for f/8. Nicely done.

Crablezworth wrote:

Kaaihn wrote:Thanks for the tips so far. One thing I did notice was I was set to Continuous AF instead of Monitoring or Single. Continuous AF forces the AF range finder to Center AF. Changing to Monitoring let me switch the AF range finder to Multipoint AF, that made a huge difference.

This is Multipoint AF with aperature open to it's widest (2.8 I think), with the most even lighting I could manage against a white base and backdrop. Not perfect, but not bad. I'm not sure what else I can do with this camera to improve the shot further.

Nahh that was at f/8 not f/2.8, but it looks really good for f/8. Nicely done.

Is the only way to improve the focus of this further to use a different camera that can get to a higher aperture value? If so, what value would you recommend I look for in my next camera?

The specs of my camera say my f value is 2.0-2.8, that's why I assumed my shot was at 2.8, the max. On the camera itself in the aperture value setting though, it starts at 2.0, and moves through 2.2, 2.5, 2.8, 3.2, etc. All the way up to 8.0. If my max is supposed to be 2.8, why does the camera have all these values above 2.8?

Also, you mentioned shooting in RAW instead of normal, what would that do for the photo? I've never worked with the RAW setting.

If I remember right 2.0 is almost wide open. To improve depth of field you need a small hole , f8 for your camera , and a long exposure time, ( or fast film ) to make up for the low light level caused by the small hole. Like a pin hole camera , the smaller the hole the sharper the image.

It makes the image size (in mb) larger as it preserves ALL data for the shot (chrom/luminance/separate colours, and other details) as is. Saving as jpeg loses info as it blends into one smaller image and removes 'redundant' data.

My 2Gb card for my SLR gives me 320 photos at 6Mb JPG setting, and 65 at RAW setting. If I were using a mate's 10Mp camera (the one that replaced mine), I'd need a 4Gb card for the same.
(to give you an idea of the size difference).

Awesome picture, awesome army and awesome paint scheme.

Aduro wrote:Awesome picture, awesome army and awesome paint scheme.

Oh yeah. What he said.

Kaaihn wrote:

Crablezworth wrote:

Kaaihn wrote:Thanks for the tips so far. One thing I did notice was I was set to Continuous AF instead of Monitoring or Single. Continuous AF forces the AF range finder to Center AF. Changing to Monitoring let me switch the AF range finder to Multipoint AF, that made a huge difference.

This is Multipoint AF with aperature open to it's widest (2.8 I think), with the most even lighting I could manage against a white base and backdrop. Not perfect, but not bad. I'm not sure what else I can do with this camera to improve the shot further.

Nahh that was at f/8 not f/2.8, but it looks really good for f/8. Nicely done.

Is the only way to improve the focus of this further to use a different camera that can get to a higher aperture value? If so, what value would you recommend I look for in my next camera?

The specs of my camera say my f value is 2.0-2.8, that's why I assumed my shot was at 2.8, the max. On the camera itself in the aperture value setting though, it starts at 2.0, and moves through 2.2, 2.5, 2.8, 3.2, etc. All the way up to 8.0. If my max is supposed to be 2.8, why does the camera have all these values above 2.8?

Also, you mentioned shooting in RAW instead of normal, what would that do for the photo? I've never worked with the RAW setting.

Well in all honesty it looks pretty good at f/8 all things considered. If you want to have more in focus I would suggest a cheaper camera with a smaller sensor, specifically I like canon but really any little point and shoot with manual mode would work well. The 2.0-2.8 indicates that when you zoom all the way in the fastest it can shoot is f/2.8, this is common, it's hard to design a lens with a lot of zoom that can keep a constant aperture. Aperture gets confusing, the basic idea the smaller the number, the bigger the opening, the more light you're allowing into the camera, the more shallow the focus, The higher the numner (f/8, f/16) the smaller the opening, the less light you're letting into the camera, the less shallow the focus.

Shooting in raw gives you a lot more control over the image but unless you have photoshop or lightroom or aperture you won't be able to edit raw files.

That's some nice painting there man

Thank you for the compliments and the tips. I will try shooting in RAW and see if that makes any difference.

I am shooting in aperture priority mode, meaning exposure, shutter speed, everything but aperture is on auto. I can't say whether or not the camera is making the best choices on everything else, and I don't have a light meter to know what those settings should be by hand. I'll post something new if shooting in RAW makes any difference.

Crablezworth wrote:
Shooting in raw gives you a lot more control over the image but unless you have photoshop or lightroom or aperture you won't be able to edit raw files.

Gimp does have a plugin for RAW (it's the editor I use). Canon RAW and Nikon RAW can be problematic (RAW isn't so much a standard as multiple standards).
The pentax RAW format gives it no issues. You pretty much have to use Lightroom for Nikon RAW (AFAIK - I don't use Nikon. I like my spine as it is).

If you Don't start shooting it in RAW, you'll probably have GWAR! come ranting about it and telling you you're doing it wrong.

||
||
\/

If you join me in our youtube war gaming ventrilo server I can give you instructions on how to take better pictures using your camera. If you would like to see what I have been shooting, here is the link...

www.flickr.com/photos/ff151

I have helped numerous people on ventrilo get to know the correct settings when using their camera to shoot minis. It's alot easier talking you through it with your camera in hand than it is using forums. Lemme know.

Cat/

Catattafish wrote:If you join me in our youtube war gaming ventrilo server I can give you instructions on how to take better pictures using your camera. If you would like to see what I have been shooting, here is the link...

www.flickr.com/photos/ff151

I have helped numerous people on ventrilo get to know the correct settings when using their camera to shoot minis. It's alot easier talking you through it with your camera in hand than it is using forums. Lemme know.

Cat/

Looking at the quality of shots in that link, I would be a fool to pass up such a generous offer! Sending a PM to follow up further.

hey guys can someone tell me how to paint the infernus chapter? It looks really really good!! I am a new to warhammer 40k and dont like blood angels color is ultramarines color but when i saw the infernus chapter space marines, I was like WOW.