I need some help please!

[tlcmommyx4]

I got a Canon T1i about 3 weeks ago, and have taken 2 hour long classes. Our homework this week was to work on Shutter Speed. I went to my sister's barrell race today thinking this would work great for my homework, NOT!
1. I have seen several pics on this board that have been taken at night with no flash, yet when I tryed this today with a high ISO you could see nothing.

2. Some of my pics look yellow?

3. On the second pic that I am posting there are spots on the pics? My camera is only 3 weeks old, could this be condensation?

4. Some are very blurry?

If I could get some advise I would be so grateful.

Thank you so much for trying to help me. I don't want to be someone who takes pictures in the Auto mode

 

[ukcatfan]

1. I have seen several pics on this board that have been taken at night with no flash, yet when I tryed this today with a high ISO you could see nothing.

2. Some of my pics look yellow?

3. On the second pic that I am posting there are spots on the pics? My camera is only 3 weeks old, could this be condensation?

4. Some are very blurry?

Thank you so much for trying to help me. I don't want to be someone who takes pictures in the Auto mode

1. You either had too fast of a shutter speed or the aperture was as wide as it can get but still not able to get enough light. The largest aperture I saw in your examples was f/5, which is not large at all. Many of the shots you are talking about were probably taken with better lenses capable of larger apertures like f/1.4 - 2.8.

2. That is the white balance. Shoot RAW and set it after the fact or use custom WB when in artificial lighting situations. The presets can sometimes be alright, but IMO, never nail it as good as you can do in RAW.

3. The flash fired in this shot, which caused the dust in the air close to your camera to reflect the light back into the lens.

4. You shot at 1/200, which is not fast enough for action shots with as close as you were given your focal lengths. I believe 1/500 would probably have been fast enough.

 

[Daisy14'sDH]

1. You either had too fast of a shutter speed or the aperture was as wide as it can get but still not able to get enough light. The largest aperture I saw in your examples was f/5, which is not large at all. Many of the shots you are talking about were probably taken with better lenses capable of larger apertures like f/1.4 - 2.8.

2. That is the white balance. Shoot RAW and set it after the fact or use custom WB when in artificial lighting situations. The presets can sometimes be alright, but IMO, never nail it as good as you can do in RAW.

3. The flash fired in this shot, which caused the dust in the air close to your camera to reflect the light back into the lens.

4. You shot at 1/200, which is not fast enough for action shots with as close as you were given your focal lengths. I believe 1/500 would probably have been fast enough.

How do you get the shutter speeds and Aperture sixe from her postings? Teach me oh wise one...

 

[disneyboy2003]

How do you get the shutter speeds and Aperture sixe from her postings? Teach me oh wise one...

I'm sure there are a bunch of different ways of doing this. You could right-click-save each photo, which saves the photo onto your computer. Then view the properties of each photo on your computer by right-clicking the photo and selecting Properties. You should be able to view the EXIF data for each photo.

Another way of doing this (if you don't want to save other people's photos onto your computer) is to use Jeffrey Friedl's online EXIF viewer: http://regex.info/exif.cgi. Right-click on a photo and select "copy image URL". Then go to the online EXIF viewer and paste that URL. The Web page will then display all the EXIF data for that photo.


To the OP, ukcatfan has already provided all the answers to your questions about your photos. The thing about indoor events is that it's a low-light location, so you need a lens that works best in low-light (ie. a lens with a large aperture / small f-number). The kit lens that you're using is not ideal for these low-light situations.

For example, look for a prime lens that has a maximum aperture of f/1.4. Compared to your f/5.6, an f/1.4 lens will let in 8x more light into the camera, allowing you to use much much faster shutter speeds.

For the barrel race, it looks like things are pretty fast-paced. The slowest shutter speed I would have chosen would've been about 1/500 sec, and I would have probably tried for 1/1000 sec shutter speed if I could.

The other thing, too, is that using your pop-up flash will limit your shutter speed to 1/200 sec, regardless of what you had set your shutter speed to. You won't be able to use anything faster than 1/200 if you try to use flash. (there's a way to use faster shutter speeds with flash, but you'll need an external flash and set the flash to "high-speed sync")

So, ideally, in this situation, I would have used a 50mm f/1.4 lens, set a shutter speed of 1/500 to 1/1000 sec, use ISO 800-1600, and no flash.


BTW, another idea for your "shutter speed" assignment would be to take photos using slooooooow shutter speeds, like taking photos of waterfalls, fountains, low-light city scapes, spinning things, etc. Just an idea.

 

[ukcatfan]

How do you get the shutter speeds and Aperture sixe from her postings? Teach me oh wise one...

If you use Firefox, try the plug-in Exif Viewer https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/3905 You just right click and select view EXIF. Some sites block the data and some people strip the data while resizing for the web though, so it does not always work. I believe the Opanda viewer will also do it for free.

 

[tlcmommyx4]

3. The flash fired in this shot, which caused the dust in the air close to your camera to reflect the light back into the lens.

OMG that is great to know. I though something was wrong with my lens! I really do want to thank you so much for helping me out

The other thing, too, is that using your pop-up flash will limit your shutter speed to 1/200 sec, regardless of what you had set your shutter speed to. You won't be able to use anything faster than 1/200 if you try to use flash. (there's a way to use faster shutter speeds with flash, but you'll need an external flash and set the flash to "high-speed sync")

This is a lightbulb moment, because when ukcatfan said that my settings were at 1/200 I was confused because I did have it set at 1/800 on my camera . That helps so much to think that I am not going crazy! The prime lens you are talking about is the same thing as the "nifty fifty"? If so I have looked at them on line and there seems to be a big price difference in them, some I found for around $100.00 and others are around $300. Were is the best place to purchase one at the best bargin of course.

Thank you guys both I am learning so much from reading your post and looking at your amazing pictures

 

[MarkBarbieri]

3. The flash fired in this shot, which caused the dust in the air close to your camera to reflect the light back into the lens.

I'm not convinced it was a flashed piece of dust. It might have been, but it almost might be an internal reflection caused by one of the lights in the picture. If the OP was using a UV filter, I'd blame that before I blamed the flash.

 

[ukcatfan]

I'm not convinced it was a flashed piece of dust. It might have been, but it almost might be an internal reflection caused by one of the lights in the picture. If the OP was using a UV filter, I'd blame that before I blamed the flash.

Very true. As far as I know, a hood is not supplied with the kit lens, so one was probably not used.

 

[tlcmommyx4]

Very true. As far as I know, a hood is not supplied with the kit lens, so one was probably not used.

So I need a hood also? You are right I did not use a hood. I just keep learning new things every post
Thanks

 

[disneyboy2003]

The prime lens you are talking about is the same thing as the "nifty fifty"? If so I have looked at them on line and there seems to be a big price difference in them, some I found for around $100.00 and others are around $300. Were is the best place to purchase one at the best bargin of course.

The "nifty fifty" typically refers to the 50mm f/1.8 lens, which usually runs about $100. This lens is a GREAT value! You can experiment with low-light photography at a very cheap price! The only (very minor) negative about this is that it feels like it's made of plastic. Here's the link to B&H Photo for this lens: link.

There is also a 50mm f/1.4 lens that costs about $350. This lens lets in almost 2x more light compared to the f/1.8 lens. It's a nice, sturdy lens with quick autofocus. Here's the link to B&H Photo for this lens: link.

Another popular low-light prime lens (especially on this message board) is the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 lens for $439. A lot of folks use this lens on dark rides at Disney World. Here's the link to B&H Photo for this lens: link.

I typically buy camera stuff from either B&H Photo or Adorama. There are other reputable camera/photography companies, too.

The other thing to do would be to buy from your local camera store. Prices at local camera stores might be slightly higher, but at least you'll be supporting a very important local business. This is important, especially if you ever want to touch, inspect, and try out any lens before purchasing...you can't really do that with an online store.


BTW, regarding your original question about why you initially got black pictures...sounds like you started off setting your camera at 1/800 sec shutter speed, but your lens' maximum aperture was f/5.6. Because you were in a low-light setting, this is probably why your photos were very very very underexposed (all black).

 

[tlcmommyx4]

BTW, regarding your original question about why you initially got black pictures...sounds like you started off setting your camera at 1/800 sec shutter speed, but your lens' maximum aperture was f/5.6. Because you were in a low-light setting, this is probably why your photos were very very very underexposed (all black).

So I am so sorry about not understanding, but how would I know what the max speed would be? Is there a formula that takes aperuture and something else to give you a max shutter speed?

 

[disneyboy2003]

So I am so sorry about not understanding, but how would I know what the max speed would be? Is there a formula that takes aperuture and something else to give you a max shutter speed?

I was only guessing, based on previous experience, that at an aperture of f/5.6, it seemed like a shutter speed of 1/800 sec would be way to fast for a low-light indoor event.

However, the way to determine whether you've got "the correct" shutter speed is to look at the exposure level indicator. When you look inside the viewfinder, there should be a bunch of bars that span from "-2" to "2" at the bottom center, directly under the image. Here's a picture I stole from dpreview.com:

For most photos, your goal is to try to get the arrow to point right in the middle of those bars. You do this by changing the shutter speed, aperture, and ISO back-and-forth until you finally get the arrow to point right in the middle...that's when you know that the settings you chose will exactly match the camera's guess as to the proper exposure for the scene.

Sometimes (or oftentimes), the camera is wrong about the "correct" exposure, and that's when you'll need to use faster/slower shutter speeds, smaller/larger apertures, etc to achieve the "correct" exposure for a photo. Examples include taking photos in the snow, at a concert/show, or any scene that's mostly bright white or mostly black. Anyway, that's a topic for later on, when you get into intermediate stuff.

In your case, you were using shutter priority (Tv). When you set the shutter speed to 1/800 sec and looked through the viewfinder, you may have seen that the exposure level indicator was WAY on the left side. In that case, the camera guessed that the settings you chose would underexpose the scene, making your pictures black (or very very very dark). As you turn the wheel to set slower and slower shutter speeds, the exposure level indicator should have moved closer to the center.

That's what I'm guessing may have happened. Is that right?

 

[funkychunkymonkey]

I love this thread. I learned alot about lenses. I know I want a nifty fifty now.

 

[tlcmommyx4]

In your case, you were using shutter priority (Tv). When you set the shutter speed to 1/800 sec and looked through the viewfinder, you may have seen that the exposure level indicator was WAY on the left side. In that case, the camera guessed that the settings you chose would underexpose the scene, making your pictures black (or very very very dark). As you turn the wheel to set slower and slower shutter speeds, the exposure level indicator should have moved closer to the center.

That's what I'm guessing may have happened. Is that right?

When I got to the race I knew that I would need a shutter speed of at least 1/500. So that was my first setting on TV mode I also set the ISO on 800 and then went up to 3200. I did some pics with the flash and some without and you know what happened with the ones without the flash (very dark ), then went on to mess with the WB because I though I needed to change it to help me. To tell you the complete truth I didn't even look at the settings in the camera, people were coming out so fast and I wanted to figure out what was the right setting befor my sister rode, all I could think about was high Shutter speed stops the action, high ISO should let in the most light and I gave up on the WB and put it on AWB. I have the last of my 1hour class this Wednesday and we are going to talk about Metering, and I think that may have helped me out too. I want so bad to get this stuff down and I feel so defeated when I think I have it and I don't. I have to remind myself that this is my first DSLR and I have only had it for 3 weeks. I do really thank you for all your help, their is only so much I can learn in a hour long class. I am going to take it out tomorrow and see if I can practice what you were telling me about getting the exposure level to the center! Thank you, thank you, thank you!

 

[ThurlFan]

all I could think about was high Appeture stops the action, high ISO should let in the most light

Technically, aperture controls the amount of light. It's the shutter speed that stops the action. The ISO refers to the sensitivity of the sensor.

Having said that, the wider aperture does *allow* you to stop the action by using a faster shutter speed - but so does a higher ISO (increased sensitivity). In extreme cases you'll have to push both the ISO and the aperture (higher sensitivity + more light) to get the shutter speed you need to stop the action.

Overall you shouldn't feel too bad because that looks like a very challenging arena for action photography.

 

[tlcmommyx4]

Technically, aperture controls the amount of light. It's the shutter speed that stops the action. The ISO refers to the sensitivity of the sensor.

Having said that, the wider aperture does *allow* you to stop the action by using a faster shutter speed - but so does a higher ISO (increased sensitivity). In extreme cases you'll have to push both the ISO and the aperture (higher sensitivity + more light) to get the shutter speed you need to stop the action.

Overall you shouldn't feel too bad because that looks like a very challenging arena for action photography.[/QUOTE

I'm sorry, you are correct, I meant to say high Shutter speed means stoping the action. I will get this all someday . Thanks for helping me out!

 

[disneyboy2003]

I want so bad to get this stuff down and I feel so defeated when I think I have it and I don't. I have to remind myself that this is my first DSLR and I have only had it for 3 weeks. I do really thank you for all your help, their is only so much I can learn in a hour long class. I am going to take it out tomorrow and see if I can practice what you were telling me about getting the exposure level to the center! Thank you, thank you, thank you!

Yes, please don't beat yourself up over this. You actually did pretty good, considering you've had your camera for only 3 weeks, especially in a very challenging low-light situation. The settings you used actually would have worked out great in a bright outdoor sporting event (ex. soccer, football, baseball during the day).

Remember that tip about a maximum shutter speed of 1/200 while using flash? That took me over a year to find that out.

The first time I took my DSLR out for a spin, I went to a tour of homes, where folks walk inside many different homes to get ideas for interior decorating, patios, landscaping, etc. I thought that I had "graduated" from my bridge camera and was now getting my feet wet with this DSLR. However, my indoor photos were way too dark, and I didn't have a clue what to do.

There's certainly a learning curve with photography, and I think you're off to a great start. You can also look to your local bookstore for an "Intro to Digital Photography" book (there are dozens and dozens of them) to reinforce the things you've learned in class.

 

[tlcmommyx4]

Thanks Disneyboy, I hope you have a great day! The great people of this board keep me inspired by all their amazing photography. I will get there someday.

 

[boBQuincy]

While the fastest shutter speed when using flash is usually 1/200 it is somewhat misleading as to what is really going on. 1/200 is chosen because that is the fastest speed at which the first shutter curtain is fully open *and* the second shutter curtain has not started moving. In other words this is the fastest speed at which the entire frame is open at one time. Look up "focal plane shutters" to see how this works but 1/200 is the fastest actual speed at which most of them operate.

1/200 doesn't sound very fast *however*, the flash is usually of such short duration, 1/1000 to 1/50,000, that the ambient light often contributes little to the image. The flash duration depends on the distance to the subject and the aperture (and ISO), close up results in less duration. At long distances the flash contributes less to the lighting and ambient light usually has the greatest effect on the exposure.
In the OP's photos the near and far objects are lighted consistently, indicating the flash did not have a great effect on the exposure, if it did the background would be much darker than the foreground.

 

[tlcmommyx4]

Is this kinda what you are talking about, with the flash lighting up the horse so much!