Re: Multiple exposures with * ist D
The *istD way makes more sense to me - leaves you in control of amount of exposure for each shot. Bruce Monday, November 15, 2004, 10:44:03 AM, you wrote: J> I've only tried this once, and IIRC, it doesn't work exactly the same J> way as it did on Z-1. J> The Z-1 would subtract some time from each exposure to make the final J> result correct. J> I think the *istD doesn't do that, but rather take all exposures J> straight according to the meter. J> Jostein J> - Original Message - J> From: "Kenneth Waller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> J> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> J> Sent: Sunday, November 14, 2004 11:20 PM J> Subject: Multiple exposures with * ist D >> Any listers have experience using this function? >> I'd like to hear of your experience/comments on using this function. J> Was >> exposure acceptable etc? >> >> Kenneth Waller >>
Re: Multiple exposures with * ist D
I've only tried this once, and IIRC, it doesn't work exactly the same way as it did on Z-1. The Z-1 would subtract some time from each exposure to make the final result correct. I think the *istD doesn't do that, but rather take all exposures straight according to the meter. Jostein - Original Message - From: "Kenneth Waller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, November 14, 2004 11:20 PM Subject: Multiple exposures with * ist D > Any listers have experience using this function? > I'd like to hear of your experience/comments on using this function. Was > exposure acceptable etc? > > Kenneth Waller >
Re: Multiple exposures with * ist D
- Original Message - From: "Kenneth Waller" Subject: Multiple exposures with * ist D Any listers have experience using this function? I'd like to hear of your experience/comments on using this function. Was exposure acceptable etc? I tried it for fun, just to see if it worked. It works. Exposures were fine, the camera seems to compensate quite nicely. William Robb
Re: Multiple exposures with the *istD
on 25.05.04 15:27, Rob Studdert at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Thanks for that info, I had no idea, I had read the manual but I missed it > obviously. Well, you didn't. It is not mentioned in manual. Pentax is well known for hiding some features and not mentioning about it in manuals... I haven seen no mention about flash exposure compensation (for TTL flashes) in hyper manual mode or possibility to set manual white balance with flash (great for spot-on exposures with strong artificial ligths)... > However of more interest to me would be a bracketing option that > maintained the exposure but changed the aperture and shutter values, like an > auto HyM function. Of course all this can be achieved manually however it > would > be nice to be able to not have to touch the camera to do so, so as to > eliminate > inadvertent repositioning or vibrations. Yeah, it would be nice, but settable only via main menu - so they could do it just via firmware upgrade :-) -- Best Regards Sylwek
Re: Multiple exposures with the *istD
On 25 May 2004 at 13:48, Sylwester Pietrzyk wrote: > Rob, actually you have aperture bracketing in *istD. Just switch it to Tv or HyM > mode (green button must be set to shift Tv value only in second case) and > bracketing will change only aperture value in 0.3 or 0.5 steps depending on your > CFs setup :-) Thanks for that info, I had no idea, I had read the manual but I missed it obviously. However of more interest to me would be a bracketing option that maintained the exposure but changed the aperture and shutter values, like an auto HyM function. Of course all this can be achieved manually however it would be nice to be able to not have to touch the camera to do so, so as to eliminate inadvertent repositioning or vibrations. Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: Multiple exposures with the *istD
on 25.05.04 0:40, Rob Studdert at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > The sorts of suggestions you made are just the type of things that I'd shoot > multiple images for and then post process in PS. I'm still not sure if I can > ever find a use for it. I do wish that they'd concentrated their efforts on > important things like providing wider stop range for auto bracketing and maybe > focus and aperture bracketing. These sorts of "advancements" would have been > far more useful to me as they can't be duplicated post capture. Rob, actually you have aperture bracketing in *istD. Just switch it to Tv or HyM mode (green button must be set to shift Tv value only in second case) and bracketing will change only aperture value in 0.3 or 0.5 steps depending on your CFs setup :-) -- Best Regards Sylwek
Re: Multiple exposures with the *istD
On 24 May 2004 at 19:17, Jostein wrote: > In reply to Rob: > > I'd use multiexposure for astro and other low light conditions where slow > movement might cause a blur. Eg. forest plants that would move even in > slight breeze. And the occational time-lapse... The sorts of suggestions you made are just the type of things that I'd shoot multiple images for and then post process in PS. I'm still not sure if I can ever find a use for it. I do wish that they'd concentrated their efforts on important things like providing wider stop range for auto bracketing and maybe focus and aperture bracketing. These sorts of "advancements" would have been far more useful to me as they can't be duplicated post capture. Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: Multiple exposures with the *istD
In reply to Rob: I'd use multiexposure for astro and other low light conditions where slow movement might cause a blur. Eg. forest plants that would move even in slight breeze. And the occational time-lapse... Jostein - Original Message - From: "Kenneth Waller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, May 24, 2004 6:01 PM Subject: Re: Multiple exposures with the *istD > Rob, > in response to ...In what circumstances would you be likely to use the multiple exposure function > on the *ist D? I've been shooting multiples on film where I do a sharp focus and then a soft focus, also leaves on flowing water and multiples as I zoom the lens, you know artsey fartsey stuff. > > > -Original Message- > From: Rob Studdert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: Re: Multiple exposures with the *istD > > On 24 May 2004 at 11:30, Kenneth Waller wrote: > > > Rob, > > pg 84 step 3, in the manual, makes no mention of exposure compensation for > > multiple exposures. In the MZ-S and the PZ1P, which also have multiple exposure > > capabilities, there is no mention about exposure compensation for multiple > > exposures either and if you simply shoot multiples in these film cameras you get > > over exposed images. On those cameras I simply reset ISO per the number of > > multiple exposures - ie for 4 exposures, multiple ISO by 4 and reset ISO setting > > for that group of multiples. This can't be done on the *istD. > > Sorry I missed the thrust of the question obviously. However on the rare > occasions that I've used multiple exposures I've always used manual exposure in > any case. I wouldn't have even guessed that exposure compensation may have been > automated. This degree of automation seems a bit pointless anyhow, surely it > can only work effectively if the subsequent exposures are fin the same light > and from the same POV? You learn something everyday I guess. > > In what circumstances would you be likely to use the multiple exposure function > on the *ist D? > > > Rob Studdert > HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA > Tel +61-2-9554-4110 > UTC(GMT) +10 Hours > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ > Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 > > > > > PeoplePC Online > A better way to Internet > http://www.peoplepc.com >
Re: Multiple exposures with the *istD
For me, use of multi-exposure would be either to add a moon or some such into the sky (different exposure, view, etc) or to make a collage in a portrait (different view). Neither seems to make sense for simple image merging that is being discussed. -- Best regards, Bruce Monday, May 24, 2004, 8:46:20 AM, you wrote: RS> On 24 May 2004 at 11:30, Kenneth Waller wrote: >> Rob, >> pg 84 step 3, in the manual, makes no mention of exposure compensation for >> multiple exposures. In the MZ-S and the PZ1P, which also have multiple exposure >> capabilities, there is no mention about exposure compensation for multiple >> exposures either and if you simply shoot multiples in these film cameras you get >> over exposed images. On those cameras I simply reset ISO per the number of >> multiple exposures - ie for 4 exposures, multiple ISO by 4 and reset ISO setting >> for that group of multiples. This can't be done on the *istD. RS> Sorry I missed the thrust of the question obviously. However on the rare RS> occasions that I've used multiple exposures I've always used manual exposure in RS> any case. I wouldn't have even guessed that exposure compensation may have been RS> automated. This degree of automation seems a bit pointless anyhow, surely it RS> can only work effectively if the subsequent exposures are fin the same light RS> and from the same POV? You learn something everyday I guess. RS> In what circumstances would you be likely to use the multiple exposure function RS> on the *ist D? RS> Rob Studdert RS> HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA RS> Tel +61-2-9554-4110 RS> UTC(GMT) +10 Hours RS> [EMAIL PROTECTED] RS> http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ RS> Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: Multiple exposures with the *istD
Rob, in response to ...In what circumstances would you be likely to use the multiple exposure function on the *ist D? I've been shooting multiples on film where I do a sharp focus and then a soft focus, also leaves on flowing water and multiples as I zoom the lens, you know artsey fartsey stuff. -Original Message- From: Rob Studdert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Multiple exposures with the *istD On 24 May 2004 at 11:30, Kenneth Waller wrote: > Rob, > pg 84 step 3, in the manual, makes no mention of exposure compensation for > multiple exposures. In the MZ-S and the PZ1P, which also have multiple exposure > capabilities, there is no mention about exposure compensation for multiple > exposures either and if you simply shoot multiples in these film cameras you get > over exposed images. On those cameras I simply reset ISO per the number of > multiple exposures - ie for 4 exposures, multiple ISO by 4 and reset ISO setting > for that group of multiples. This can't be done on the *istD. Sorry I missed the thrust of the question obviously. However on the rare occasions that I've used multiple exposures I've always used manual exposure in any case. I wouldn't have even guessed that exposure compensation may have been automated. This degree of automation seems a bit pointless anyhow, surely it can only work effectively if the subsequent exposures are fin the same light and from the same POV? You learn something everyday I guess. In what circumstances would you be likely to use the multiple exposure function on the *ist D? Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 PeoplePC Online A better way to Internet http://www.peoplepc.com
Re: Multiple exposures with the *istD
Apparently, when you dial in the number of multiple exposures, the software compensates the actual exposure depending on the number dialed in. Ken Waller -Original Message- From: William Kane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Multiple exposures with the *istD I believe that the way the *ist D handles multiple exposures is entirely different from film. We're all discussing how it should be calculating 1/2 the exposure for the first shot and the other 1/2 the exposure for the second shot . . . . . . what if the *ist D is a far more simple beast? What if when you tell it you are doing a 2 shot multi-exposure, it takes the next 2 pictures at full exposure (unless told to do otherwise) and then simply merges the two together? This seems far more likely given the apparent ability for the *ist D to get the exposures right all the time. Just a thought, though experience tells me I am not always right, IL Bill On Monday, May 24, 2004, at 10:30 AM, Kenneth Waller wrote: > Rob, > pg 84 step 3, in the manual, makes no mention of exposure compensation > for multiple exposures. In the MZ-S and the PZ1P, which also have > multiple exposure capabilities, there is no mention about exposure > compensation for multiple exposures either and if you simply shoot > multiples in these film cameras you get over exposed images. On those > cameras I simply reset ISO per the number of multiple exposures - ie > for 4 exposures, multiple ISO by 4 and reset ISO setting for that > group of multiples. This can't be done on the *istD. > > -Original Message- > From: Rob Studdert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: May 23, 2004 6:42 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Multiple exposures with the *istD > > On 23 May 2004 at 17:32, Kenneth Waller wrote: > >> William, >> So apparently, the magic occurs when you set the multiple exposure >> number. >> Would have been nice if that was mentioned in the manual! > > Page 84, step 3 > > > Rob Studdert > HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA > Tel +61-2-9554-4110 > UTC(GMT) +10 Hours > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ > Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 > > > > > PeoplePC Online > A better way to Internet > http://www.peoplepc.com > PeoplePC Online A better way to Internet http://www.peoplepc.com
Re: Multiple exposures with the *istD
On 24 May 2004 at 11:30, Kenneth Waller wrote: > Rob, > pg 84 step 3, in the manual, makes no mention of exposure compensation for > multiple exposures. In the MZ-S and the PZ1P, which also have multiple exposure > capabilities, there is no mention about exposure compensation for multiple > exposures either and if you simply shoot multiples in these film cameras you get > over exposed images. On those cameras I simply reset ISO per the number of > multiple exposures - ie for 4 exposures, multiple ISO by 4 and reset ISO setting > for that group of multiples. This can't be done on the *istD. Sorry I missed the thrust of the question obviously. However on the rare occasions that I've used multiple exposures I've always used manual exposure in any case. I wouldn't have even guessed that exposure compensation may have been automated. This degree of automation seems a bit pointless anyhow, surely it can only work effectively if the subsequent exposures are fin the same light and from the same POV? You learn something everyday I guess. In what circumstances would you be likely to use the multiple exposure function on the *ist D? Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: Multiple exposures with the *istD
I believe that the way the *ist D handles multiple exposures is entirely different from film. We're all discussing how it should be calculating 1/2 the exposure for the first shot and the other 1/2 the exposure for the second shot . . . . . . what if the *ist D is a far more simple beast? What if when you tell it you are doing a 2 shot multi-exposure, it takes the next 2 pictures at full exposure (unless told to do otherwise) and then simply merges the two together? This seems far more likely given the apparent ability for the *ist D to get the exposures right all the time. Just a thought, though experience tells me I am not always right, IL Bill On Monday, May 24, 2004, at 10:30 AM, Kenneth Waller wrote: Rob, pg 84 step 3, in the manual, makes no mention of exposure compensation for multiple exposures. In the MZ-S and the PZ1P, which also have multiple exposure capabilities, there is no mention about exposure compensation for multiple exposures either and if you simply shoot multiples in these film cameras you get over exposed images. On those cameras I simply reset ISO per the number of multiple exposures - ie for 4 exposures, multiple ISO by 4 and reset ISO setting for that group of multiples. This can't be done on the *istD. -Original Message- From: Rob Studdert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: May 23, 2004 6:42 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Multiple exposures with the *istD On 23 May 2004 at 17:32, Kenneth Waller wrote: William, So apparently, the magic occurs when you set the multiple exposure number. Would have been nice if that was mentioned in the manual! Page 84, step 3 Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 PeoplePC Online A better way to Internet http://www.peoplepc.com
Re: Multiple exposures with the *istD
Rob, pg 84 step 3, in the manual, makes no mention of exposure compensation for multiple exposures. In the MZ-S and the PZ1P, which also have multiple exposure capabilities, there is no mention about exposure compensation for multiple exposures either and if you simply shoot multiples in these film cameras you get over exposed images. On those cameras I simply reset ISO per the number of multiple exposures - ie for 4 exposures, multiple ISO by 4 and reset ISO setting for that group of multiples. This can't be done on the *istD. -Original Message- From: Rob Studdert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: May 23, 2004 6:42 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Multiple exposures with the *istD On 23 May 2004 at 17:32, Kenneth Waller wrote: > William, > So apparently, the magic occurs when you set the multiple exposure number. > Would have been nice if that was mentioned in the manual! Page 84, step 3 Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 PeoplePC Online A better way to Internet http://www.peoplepc.com
Re: Multiple exposures with the *istD
- Original Message - From: "Kenneth Waller" < Subject: Multiple exposures with the *istD > If you've tried multiple exposures with the *ist D, what method of "exposure > compensation" are you using? > With a film camera I multiply the film ISO by the number of multiple > exposures taken - ie set ISO 50 to 200 to take 4 exposures on the same > frame. That's not going to do it on the *istD. > There are a variety of ways to do this but I was wondering what others do? For fun, I tried a 9 exposure multiple, no compensation of any kind, and lo and behold, the exposure was bang on. It's majik, I tell you. Majik. Magic. William Robb
Re: Multiple exposures
Yes, that is what exactly I want to know. Any suggestion/comment?? Regards, Ayash K. On Mon, 4 Jun 2001, Eduardo Carone Costa Júnior wrote: > Thanks for the precise explanations. just one more question: How do you > determine how many exposures do you need to get it right? My guess is that, > on that particular photo, one second exposures wouldn't be short enough to > do the trick... - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Multiple exposures
- Original Message - From: "Eduardo Carone Costa Júnior" Subject: Re: Multiple exposures > Thanks for the precise explanations. just one more question: How do you > determine how many exposures do you need to get it right? My guess is that, > on that particular photo, one second exposures wouldn't be short enough to > do the trick... I first decide what aperture I need to secure sufficient depth of field, or which aperture is best on the lens in question if DOF is not a consideration. I then meter the scene to determine the exposure time needed for that aperture. While I am working this out, I am also determining what shutter speed would best serve the effect I want to achieve. Do I want the moving water to be as sharp as possible, perhaps slightly soft will do. So, now I have determined the amount of exposure needed, and the increments that I will be using to get there. Divide one into the other to determine the number of shutter releases needed. The complication that arises is that a sort of reciprocity failure comes into play with this process, so it can be a bit of a guessing game to get it correct. William Robb Remember, the LX Gallery is coming up. Please see: http://pug.komkon.org/LX_Gallery/LX_Submit.html for more information. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Multiple exposures
Thanks for the precise explanations. just one more question: How do you determine how many exposures do you need to get it right? My guess is that, on that particular photo, one second exposures wouldn't be short enough to do the trick... - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Multiple exposures
On Sun, 3 Jun 2001, Eduardo Carone Costa Júnior wrote: > Cameron hood wrote, when describing his, by the way, gorgeous, submission > for this month's PUG: > > "Equipment: Pentax PZ-1p: 300mm F4.5 at F32; SMC 'Cloudy' filter; > multi-exposure exposure of about 8 - 10 seconds total exposure" > > I wonder what's the benefit of using multiple exposures for an image like > his, and, more important, how do you decide when the situation calls for a > multiple exposure technique? > Can someone that's used to doing this kind of thing, or ,perhaps,s the > Author himself, clarify this? > Thanks, >Eduardo. > Well, I think whenever you have a subject which is moving and therefore fills different regions of the frame at different instants of time, you call for multiple exposure. However, in Camron Hood's submission, it is the water which is the only moving subject. This photograph can be created by a long exposure also but the only problem with that is that the dark coloured rocks will appear too bright destroying the contrast in the photograph. I also think that the light was too low while the snap was taken and the cloudy filter added up to the myterious nature of the photograph. I may be wrong but I shall be very happy if somebody tells me the truth. With best regards, Ayash Kanto. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
