Insomnia and Tequila

[Jakevol2]

Couldn’t sleep last night so I decided to take some pictures play with lighting and came up with these. Some of my favorites from last night.

I used Patron anejo tequila in a Hard Rock Cafe, Las Vegas shot glass on a black poster board. The lighting was from the living room lamp.

So what do you all think?

[caradoc]

Interesting light. Is the graininess an artifact of high ISO, or compression?

[Jakevol2]

Interesting light. Is the graininess an artifact of high ISO, or compression?

Ummm n00b here, artifact?

I took the sharpness up on the first pic which produced some graininess but I liked how it turned out. My ISO was set at 80, the lowest setting. And I dont exactly know what compression is.

I just thought I took some pretty pictures 😕

The first one I want to take to work and have it blown up to a 16″x20″ with Irish Linen text, matte coated and mounted on artboard.

[caradoc]

Got links to the larger versions? When I look at the first image, I’m seeing a little bit of “stairstepping” on top of the graininess, which is likely a result of resizing the image.

[Curious]

artifacts on wiki not a great article but it will give you a general outline. then google ignoring photos of old stuff.

unless the image and files size for the first one is really big you won’t like it at 16×20. digital isn’t like film. it doesn’t scale up anywhere near as well. also not to be too picky or anything but the first one is the wrong ratio to be 16×20 since it looks to be square.

other than that A+ 🙂

[Jakevol2]

Got links to the larger versions? When I look at the first image, I’m seeing a little bit of “stairstepping” on top of the graininess, which is likely a result of resizing the image.

This is the largest image…I think. I pulled them off my Flickr account.

What is stairstepping?

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1231/766622929_d1eb926a62_o.jpg

Here is the largest version’s of the image link.

[Jakevol2]

artifacts on wiki not a great article but it will give you a general outline. then google ignoring photos of old stuff.

unless the image and files size for the first one is really big you won’t like it at 16×20. digital isn’t like film. it doesn’t scale up anywhere near as well. also not to be too picky or anything but the first one is the wrong ratio to be 16×20 since it looks to be square.

other than that A+ 🙂

I could trim it to the 16×20 ratio though, right? How can I set my camera so that if I take the image I can blow it up to large prints?

[caradoc]

OK… important note.

When linking to Flickr images, the Flickr “acceptable use policy” says you’re supposed to link to the page the image is on. So, you’ll want to do something like:

[IMG]http://www.flickr.com/image/here[/IMG]

That way, if someone clicks on the image, they’ll load the Flickr page that the image is on.

I wasn’t looking for the *image*, but the Flickr page on which the image resides, hoping that I could peek at your EXIF data to see exactly what you did for the image.

[Jakevol2]

http://www.flickr.com/photos/8587222@N08/

will this work for you cardoc?

[caradoc]

Jakevol2 wrote:

I could trim it to the 16×20 ratio though, right? How can I set my camera so that if I take the image I can blow it up to large prints?

What kind of camera? What’s the resolution?

There’s a decent chart of “megapixel to print size” here on B&H’s website.

[Jakevol2]

It’s a Canon Powershot A560

7.1 MP

[caradoc]

http://www.flickr.com/photos/8587222@N08/

will this work for you cardoc?

Yeah, that link works. According to Flickr, that image is 563×479, and that’s not going to scale at all well up to 16″x20″.

See the chart I linked in my previous post.

[Jakevol2]

yup I’m a moron. I had the camera set on “Small”….oh well live and learn.

[caradoc]

OK… I did some research. According to the specs, the A560 is capable of 7.1 megapixels, which would be scalable to the 16″x20″ image you want.

However, you have to shoot in “high” resolution to get there. The image that you’ve got on Flickr isn’t going to print at all well if you try to scale it that high.

[caradoc]

Yep. Live and learn. I decided back in December that I hated losing good composition to low resolution, and now I shoot everything in Nikon’s RAW format – it gives me the most flexibility in saving an image that had poor lighting. It also eats about 8-9MB per image.

Fortunately, 2GB SD cards are pretty cheap these days (I’ve looked at 4GB cards, and the price/speed break isn’t quite there yet.) I can stuff 160-180 images on a 2GB card before I have to swap, and they still take up a crapload less space than the 8-10 rolls of film I used to carry in the bag.

[Author]

Posts