workshop photography

Hi all m,

I was looking at some of the back issues of ME,MEW etc and was wondering how the Authors of articles in these Magazines acheive such clarity with thier photos .
I'm sure there are others out there who would like to submit articles or photos but may not own any decent photographic equipement or may feel thier skills are not up to the task .
I know there are a lot of books one can read on the subject but given that metal is reflective etc it may need some innovation to acheive the perfect photo or at least one that is good enough to publish .
With the never ending progress of technology cameras today have many gadgets , settings and gizmo's that one may never need or use , so where does a newby start ?
Obviously there are many parameters but i think the basics would help like :
Pixel count
type of lense
Lighting
Background etc .

I did do a search on this site as usuall but the ORACLE OF NO RESULTS FOUND took over and destroyed any hope i had of finding an answer .
I'm sure that Harold Hall did an article on this ?
I had a look at his website and picked up a few ideas but i'm sure there are more out there .

Just as an aside there are the varying indexes of ME & MEW that seem to be produced by readers and not the publishers to cover all of the issues available on the archive .
Why is it that i cannot go to say the first page of the digital editions and look at an updated index for all issues ?
Or it could be placed under the the link to the digital subscription you are subscribed to so you could search the index then go to the appropriate issue to read the article you are interested in .

Ian

Edited By SLOTDRILLER on 25/05/2013 09:05:44

Ian,

Harold wrote an article on photography in MEW no 158, but that is probably available on his website.

Don't use flash, it's too harsh and the light reflects. I surround the subject with reflective material -cardboard! - and use natural light whenever possible. A tripod when possible to ensure no shake, which is a cause of lots of problems with the little compact cameras, which otherwise give excellent results.

Halogen floodlights can be used for illumination, but not too close. Light at different heights from in front and both sides usually works.

I use a Nikon Coolpix 995, the one that twists in the middle so it is both an eye-level and reflex camera. This also has both Auto and Manual modes, so I can choose the setting if I want the background out of focus say.. I think these are known as "bridge" cameras these days. It is quite old, like the user.

Phil

All my workshop photo are just done with the phone, the final ones taken of the completed models are done with what would now be considered anout of date Minolta Dymage7.

Take a look in my albums to see what they come out like.

It takes long enough to edit, upload and link to build photos so I don't want to be wasting workshop time setting up for every shot, just snap and go.

J

Hi Ian,
Harold Hall wrote an article on workshop photography in MEW issue 158 (December 2009) I agree with Graham about using natural light when possible. You do not need a camera with a fantastic number of pixels but choose a camera with a macro setting so that it will focus close up. I have made a ring light using 12 1 watt LEDs for use where natural light is not available. Details are here. If possible use a tripod or other means of holding the camera steady particularly in poor light when the shutter speed will be slow. If the subject requires a good depth of focus try to use a small aperture. (This will be a compromise as reducing the aperture will require a slower shutter speed for a given amount of light.)

Les.

Ps I have just seen JasonB's reply. Jason, I too have a Minolta Dimage 7i but most of the time I use a Canon  "PowerShot A560" compact camera as it seems better at lower light levels.

Edited By Les Jones 1 on 25/05/2013 10:18:04

Not that I have done much in this context, but the photos in my article in MEW200 were taken on a Panasonic Lumix FS-35 compact digital using the camera's own flash. You will get better results by setting up the shot properly with lights, reflectors, tripod etc, but not by that much. You are not aiming for a work of art, or a business portfolio, just a workable picture illustrating the process you are describing, in a hobby magazine.

Regards

Geoff

I used to use a Fufjichrome compact with about 3 megapixels, then a HP compact with 4.

I now have a Nikon L810 which I got for about £70 as end of line stock. It will do macro down to 1cm, has a 26x optical zoom and something like 13 megapixels.

Experience shows that any basic compact that has a macro function is adequate for photos for ME. What really matters are patience and plenty of lighting. Good workshop lighting, one strong light toone side and a white card reflector on the other is as sophisticated as you need to get. Don't worry about the type of lighting as the camera's auto function will sort it out. Try to keep backgrounds uncluttered

Most of my pictures are 'could do better, but below are three pictures from the three different cameras. I think most would agree there isn't, in practice, a huge difference.

Neil'

Old Fuji compact:

HP Compact:

Nikon bridge camera:

I think the guys have covered most of what i was going to say, for set up I just use a compact camera it was an Kodak that i used for quite a few years then it gave up on me a few months ago, I've now got a Sony Cybershot baught as an end line special, and i must say like all electronic gadgetry digital camera seem to improve with every up grade, it seem to perform a lot sharper than my old Kodak. for most shots the camera is hand held, I just play about with the ligting on off , door open closed etc and subject postion until I get the result i want. Sometime I resort to a magnetic clock stand with a 1/4" BSF adaptor to take the camera but that is not very often. The hardest part of taking shop pictures with a digital camera is remembering to take it. Stew

Stew

I dont want this to sound picky, but I think you meant 1/4" WHITWORTH not BSF for the tripod thread.

It is amazing that after all these years even the most high tech brand new camera still has the good old 1/4 Whit thread it has had from all those years ago.

Phil

Hi Ian

Workshop pictures should be the easiest to take – after all the subject is stationary, you are fully in control of the conditions, can take as much time as you want over the task and, if it goes wrong, you can just try again. That said I am heavily involved with photography (to the detriment of workshop activities I fear!) but I always seem to struggle with workshop pictures!

Here are a few pointers that may help:-

1. LOOK carefully at the object you wish to photograph and decide just what aspect of it you wish to display.
2. Isolate the subject from the background (use screens etc.) or maybe just move it!
3. Put the camera on a tripod
4. Frame carefully to ensure that all the required elements are in the frame.
5. Set manual focus ( if possible) and adjust carefully
6. Selecting a small aperture (large f number ) will give maximum depth of field ( more things in focus) Conversely setting a wide aperture (small f number) will minimise depth of field and make focusing more critical ( which may help to place the emphasis where you want it.) Both options have their uses.
7. Use the self-timer to fire the shutter to eliminate camera shake.
8. Lighting. I don’t find natural light too easy and prefer to use either flash or some form of tungsten lighting – both are more controllable and can be placed just where you want them. Whichever you use it is best to diffuse the light either through the “proper” diffuser but, at a pinch, even a white handkerchief (or tissue) will do. If you can use more than one light this will often help. You may need to experiment a bit to get the best position for the light(s). Use white card or paper to reflect light onto the subject. (Note coloured card or diffusers may give you tastefully toned images but probably not quite what you seek for your workshop images!)
9. Take LOTS of shots varying the lighting and camera position – after all one major benefit of digital photography is that all exposures are “free” ( at the point of delivery anyway!)
10. As with model engineering don’t expect to succeed immediately but do keep trying. Look critically at your images and decide if it shows clearly the part / operation you are trying to demonstrate and just what, if anything, could be better. Beware though - this photography malarkey can be mighty addictive – but very satisfying!

Good luck - let us see some of your efforts and, any specific problems you have - please ask.

Regards

Norman

Edited By NJH on 25/05/2013 12:28:46

I use a compact Panasonic Lumix T27 which I suspect has been superceded by newer models, it has a good lens (Leica) and more controls than I either need or know about. I also have a Canon 350D but hardly ever use it now because the little Lumix is so much easier to carry about, and the results are more than satisfactory. Flash is never complimentary to the subject (any subject) but sometimes unavoidable. If you have to use it, and it has automatic exposure, then take care with the background and the reflectivity of other objects in the FOV. With flash the camera usually takes an average light reading which may not suit the subject you are trying to image. Also it is better to stand back and use some optical zoom if the camera offers it, there will be less distortion and the flash will be less harsh.

A good after-market image processing program (like Corel PaintShop Pro) may be able to transform a poor photo into something acceptable, and useful for re-sizing and cropping.

Hi Chris (and others)

If you are looking for an image processor for adjustments ( and you don't want to add "stuff" to your image - it is possible to take stuff out) I strongly recommend Adobe Lightroom. OK it's a bit more expensive than Corel but it is amazingly powerful, wholly non - destructive ( all changes are reversible at any time) and very intuitive to use.

Here, as they say, is one I did earlier - ! A "Before and After"

OK I'll come out of "Photo Mode" now and get on with the decorating.

Cheers

Norman

Edited By NJH on 25/05/2013 16:49:44

Ian,

I agree with most of what Norman said above, and you won't go far wrong if you follow his steps verbatim. I do differ in my own practice in a few areas; not that my approach is better, it just suits the equipment I have.

I use a Canon DSLR which is probably wildly over-specified for the job. Since my workshop has no windows, I use flash. I don't find it necessary, or even desirable, to use manual focus unless using a macro lens for ultra close-ups; the AF on the DSLR is sophisticated enough to get it right provided you know how to use it. On flash, I always use a separate (and reasonably powerful) flash - indeed my DSLR does not have a built in one anyway, and they are pretty horrible. The secret is to bounce it off the ceiling and walls behind me; these are painted white - always a good idea, and I used to use it as a darkroom, for which white is the only remotely sensible colour. Using a reflector is much better than direct flash (yuk) but bouncing from the wall/ceiling is as much better again, but you do need a gun witha rotating head, or one which is capable of being held separately.

As has been said, digital pictures are free (well, to be more accurate, they effectively have a zero short-run marginal cost), but they also have the advantage that you can look at the result immediately. With a bit of experience you can soon tell from the review picture whether the focus is sharp and the exposure is acceptable. Even the latter is a lot less critical than in film days, especially if you use RAW files and process later. I find it's rarely necessary to take more than 2 or 3 pictures unless I want a variety for composition.

David

Edited By David Littlewood on 25/05/2013 17:41:57

Wow Norman, that's a stunning result. A quick play with Corel and I can get most of your results, but not without bleaching the far wall! Are you using masks to get that result? If not, what effects (if you canremember)

Neil

If you reach a point where in spite of flat lighting you still have a reflection, the old fashioned "smear of vaseline" will kill it. In the workshop, a drapped white sheet works wonders for even lighting. If I am on the lathe and intend to take several "stage" photos, I set the camera up on a tripod and shoot all from a known viewpoint.

You won't match it - the image data isn't there in the jpg as posted. You could get close if you had the raw data file. The processed image looks a little 'over processed' to my eyes, no offense intended!

Neil

I have sent you a pm

Norman

Hi Chris

Yes I think it is rather over processed. I produced this to illustrate what is possible with the programme during a series of workshops I led.

Not able to work on the jpeg ? Hmm. Well you got me thinking so I reimported the jpeg I posted originally and processed that ( a quick and not very carefull manipulation) - what do you think?

Norman

Edited By NJH on 25/05/2013 23:46:17

Hi all,

Thanks for the replies and valuable info !

It would seem that taking some photos of a part you are making is oddly enough similar to making that part as it is all about the set up and not the size or quality of the machine you are using to machine it .
If the set up is not correct it won't matter one bit if you are using a Bridgeport or an X2 to mill it as long as it fits on the machine that is !

I have to purchase a new camera and i am relieved to know i don't need to spend a couple of grand on one when a unit costing a few hundred will do .

Screens , diffisers and lighting is something i will have to play around with as my workshop is a pretty old fibro shed and none too pretty to lok at !

Once again thanks to all who have taken the time to reply as it has given me a starting point and a direction to go in .

Ian

A big difference between the two don't you think? No blue in this one, less detail, less saturation. The compression does that.

I tried to replicate it in PSP and got close - then it crashed! From what I can see in the data there is a huge histogram manipulation and evidently a large increase in contrast and a sharpening algorithm (unsharp mask?).

Another big no-no is getting a window in the picture when shooting inside the shed. The outside sunlight will overpower the inside lighting and either cause an incandescent square in your picture, or it will upset the camera's automatic light meter and the whole shot will come out way dark. If you have a window in your shed, try to get the light from it coming in over your shoulder on to the subject as you shoot. Work with the sunlight, not against it.

Using flash, which I prefer in the workshop, it is best to use a clip-on flash that can be angled up to bounce the light off the ceiling and back down onto the subject. A small white card rubber banded to the back of the flash and sticking up an inch or so will direct enough light directly forward to fill in the shadows from the bounced overhead light. Or you can buy a frosted plastic screen device to put over your camera's flash to soften the light.

For outdoor shots at loco meetings etc, the soft light of a cloudy day makes way better pictures than harsh sunlight. To shoot machinery such as locos or motorcycles, it always helps to use the flash as well as teh natural light. The sideways light of the flash will fill in the shadows of the overhead sun light and bring out the details of teh motorcycle engine shaded under the tank or the loco valve gear shaded under the boiler.

Edited By Hopper on 26/05/2013 07:03:08