Taking pictures...

> At 9:19 PM +0200 6/18/01, Derk Groeneveld wrote:

F stop settings perhaps?

Have you a macro lens? Try the Macro lens adaptors with a wide angle up close.
Thats how you get neat effects of the big huge gun held by the tiny girl
(Trinity in the Matrix, "Dodge this!").

Oh, how long did the images take to process on the computer...just for the
edification of folks talking about miniatures web sites...

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

> On Mon, 18 Jun 2001, Ryan M Gill wrote:

> At 9:19 PM +0200 6/18/01, Derk Groeneveld wrote:

Umm. Wid open diaphragm = f-stop setting ;) Some are taken with a low
f-stop (wide open diaphragm) others with a high one.

> Have you a macro lens? Try the Macro lens adaptors with a wide angle

Yes, they were taken with a macro lense on the digital camera. Sometimes I was
so close I noticed the camera moving the miniature;)

> Oh, how long did the images take to process on the computer...just

Well, these were taken with a whopping expensive digital SLR I borrowed from
work. It took about 2 minutes per shot to get the shot sorted. Add another 2
minutes for downloading (Ugh, those serial links are SLOW), and another 2 to
get the graphics sorted, makes 6 minutes per shot. I had to discard about 1 in
3, so add 50% for 9 minutes per photo. This was AFTER sorting out automatic
adjustments and adding them to my adjustment gallery. I have a script sorted
which makes the galleries, so you have to add that process to the bulk time.

Without all the preparation stuff, I'm at 9 minutes per figure. Let's say you
have a 500 figure range. That makes it 4500 minutes work, or 75 hours
CONTINUOUS work. I'd say you can get no more than 25 of this in a week, so
that's 3 weeks spent just getting the pictures sorted. That's hardly
neglegible.

Cheers,

> At 7:20 AM +0200 6/19/01, Derk Groeneveld wrote:

Heh...don't you love differences in language. A Diaphram here in the
US is something _very_ different...(not unlike the British term for
an American Galoshes to speak of another similar item...)

> > Have you a macro lens? Try the Macro lens adaptors with a wide
Sometimes I
> was so close I noticed the camera moving the miniature ;)

I have a really nice set of macro lens attachments for a 35mm camera (those
old fashioned Film types). Naturally my sister has the camera right now, but I
have the little lenses. Very handy for small stuff.
> Without all the preparation stuff, I'm at 9 minutes per figure. Let's

But nothing on a massive scale of work. Spread that out over a few months and
its not bad. Thats what I was looking for.

I'll let the thread rest so Andy doens't kill me on sight....:)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

> On Tue, 19 Jun 2001, Ryan M Gill wrote:

> >Yes, they were taken with a macro lense on the digital camera.
Sometimes I
> >was so close I noticed the camera moving the miniature ;)

I know, I've got an ancient SLR (Minolta XG-1), myself, with
macro/teleconverter ring,  and I like using it. However, when I just
want
to quickly web-ify stuff, there's no beating a digital camera.
Unfortunately the digital SLR I borrowed from work only has two f-stop
settings. My own SLR I can stop down all the way. And I can do far longer
exposures on it, too.

Cheers,

> On Tue, 19 Jun 2001, Ryan M Gill wrote:

> At 7:20 AM +0200 6/19/01, Derk Groeneveld wrote:

Well, that's one optional definition of 'diaphragm'. The other is used (even
in American english) as Derk noted (in most of my photography books, anyhow)