Best setting?

[dreamn_Disney]

I received a Kodak Z712IS as a gift. It was not on the list of cameras I was thinking of buying, therefore I know very little about it. I have noticed that when taking night shots with the flash the pics are much less blurry than with out a flash. I want to get some pics with out the flash that are not all blurry. I have a tripod to put it on. I was just wondering what settings I should use? This is my first time stepping away from the auto settings. Any help would be great.
It also has a date stamp feature that is now turned off, but was on for the first set of pics I took. I was wondering is there any way to print the photos with out the date showing up? I have a few pics that would be cute if the date was not on the corner.
You all have been very helpful in the past and I thank you for any information you can give me.

 

[Pea-n-Me]

These links might help you a bit. It's all about exposure.

http://www.disboards.com/showthread.php?t=1842948&referrerid=70088

http://digital-photography-school.com/blog/learning-exposure-in-digital-photography/

Generally, you'd have to increase your ISO in low light settings (try Program mode, which is like Auto but allows you to adjust settings). The hazard of that is that it that beyond certain ISO settings, your pictures become noisy/grainy - not ideal. Placing your camera on a tripod or other steady surface will help for non-moving subjects; moving subjects might be more difficult to capture without some degree of blur. This is an area where point and shoots just generally don't do well. HTH

PS if you want to learn more, the book Understanding Exposure (mentioned in second link) is highly recommended on this board.

 

[dreamn_Disney]

Thank you. The grainy photo is what I have been running into when I set it to the night time setting. I will read the links and start practicing in the yard at night.

 

[thomas998]

Something else to consider is to use the slowest ISO which I think is 64 on that camera.... yeah it sounds backwards since shooting in the dark with film requires the faster ISOs... but hear me out... a digital camera isn't like film... whether you get a picture from it from ISO 200 or ISO 1600, the reality is the image was taken on the same sensor.

Changing the ISO setting doesn't cause any physical change in the sensor it only tell the camera's little computer inside to process it as if it were a higher setting which means the computer in the camera enhances the image it captures more.. sort of like popping the brightness up in photoshop....

Of course you have a little camera with limited computing power in it... if you have good software like photoshop you can lighten up an under exposed picture better than the camera can...

Now things to watch out for if you try this... you can't hope to set the shutter so slow that the image looks properly exposed... well you can try but its likely to get lots of noise since you've given the sensor even more time for stray photons to put noise in there... just play around with it and then go lighten up your images in photoshop if need be.

 

[ukcatfan]

thomas998,

While I sort of agree with you in theory, I do not think this is the kind of advice the OP was looking for. I personally believe that the technology between the sensor and camera manufacturer are likely better than what anyone can do in PS. They have their software tuned into their hardware, where PS is generic for all images (i.e. it treats them all the same). It would also be somewhat limited by the JPG encoding. JPGs throw away TONS of information, so when you go and up the exposure in PS, there is not as much to work with and the image will suffer.


dreamn_Disney,

To get night shots, just be sure not to up the ISO too much and make sure you get a proper exposure. There is not much hope of getting low light action shots without a flash on a p&s, but using a tripod will make stationary shots look just fine.

Kevin

 

[thomas998]

thomas998,

While I sort of agree with you in theory, I do not think this is the kind of advice the OP was looking for. I personally believe that the technology between the sensor and camera manufacturer are likely better than what anyone can do in PS. They have their software tuned into their hardware, where PS is generic for all images (i.e. it treats them all the same). It would also be somewhat limited by the JPG encoding. JPGs throw away TONS of information, so when you go and up the exposure in PS, there is not as much to work with and the image will suffer.


dreamn_Disney,

To get night shots, just be sure not to up the ISO too much and make sure you get a proper exposure. There is not much hope of getting low light action shots without a flash on a p&s, but using a tripod will make stationary shots look just fine.

Kevin

While I can believe the software in a DSLR would likely be as good as or better than PS... we're talking about a lower end point and shoot... I just did a search for some sample photos from it and it looks to me like you start getting some serious noise once you get to ISO 400... I don't think anything above 200 is going to be better than what he would get using PS to lighten it.

 

[ukcatfan]

While I can believe the software in a DSLR would likely be as good as or better than PS... we're talking about a lower end point and shoot... I just did a search for some sample photos from it and it looks to me like you start getting some serious noise once you get to ISO 400... I don't think anything above 200 is going to be better than what he would get using PS to lighten it.

Kodak is notorious for high noise. I don't think 400 is hardly usable on most p&s cameras. I believe you might have missed my point though. I am not saying to up the ISO. I am saying to keep the ISO to acceptable noise levels and then just accept that the shutter is going to be open for longer than hand held will allow. The OP has a tripod, so why not use it? With this method, there is no post processing needed to get a proper exposure. No matter what method, it is almost impossible to get low light action shots with a p&s.