The Rolex Forums   The Rolex Watch

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX


Go Back   Rolex Forums - Rolex Forum > Rolex & Tudor Watch Topics > Rolex General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 21 June 2007, 09:50 PM   #1
leopardprey
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Real Name: Chad
Location: Around the world
Watch: Panerai 233
Posts: 4,204
Photographing Rolex ?

Ok, you photo experts. How do I take good photos with my digital carmera. I have an Olympus 770 SW Camera. Laymans terms and how to do with out buying special lights, black boxes, etc...

Also, photos taken with the lower number of pixels so can post on the internet/TRF forum.

Seems the photos I tried to take before eith come out blurry or are too reflective.



Thanks.
leopardprey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21 June 2007, 10:20 PM   #2
Andad
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
Andad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Real Name: Eddie
Location: Australia
Watch: A few.
Posts: 37,527
Hi Chad,

I take most of mine outside and on the highest pixel setting which is 8 meg on my Sony N1 digital. I usually have a plain background or greenery for contrast. Setting is on macro and I take them from about 6 - 8 inches.
I also have a white light box with a fluorescent ring light but I find natural outdoor lighting is better for my amateur status. Watch out for reflections on the crystal but with a bit of practice you can see this on the screen.
I then use ACDSee to crop and resize.

I'm sure more professional advice will follow and I hope to learn a lot on your thread.
__________________
E

Andad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21 June 2007, 10:24 PM   #3
Alex Stylianou
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 1,785
Quote:
Originally Posted by directioneng View Post
Hi Chad,

I take most of mine outside and on the highest pixel setting which is 8 meg on my Sony N1 digital. I usually have a plain background or greenery for contrast. Setting is on macro and I take them from about 6 - 8 inches.
I also have a white light box with a fluorescent ring light but I find natural outdoor lighting is better for my amateur status. Watch out for reflections on the crystal but with a bit of practice you can see this on the screen.
I then use ACDSee to crop and resize.

I'm sure more professional advice will follow and I hope to learn a lot on your thread.
Good Post.

I Normaly Take Them On My PC Table Or Lightbox
Alex Stylianou is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21 June 2007, 11:16 PM   #4
leopardprey
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Real Name: Chad
Location: Around the world
Watch: Panerai 233
Posts: 4,204
Problem is can not take max pixels, as can not then down load on to this forum.
leopardprey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21 June 2007, 11:34 PM   #5
padi56
"TRF" Life Patron
 
padi56's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Real Name: Peter
Location: Llanfairpwllgwyng
Watch: ing you.
Posts: 53,062
Quote:
Originally Posted by leopardprey View Post
Problem is can not take max pixels, as can not then down load on to this forum.
Just shoot at your max pixel on camera then resize with your photo software after you have edited your picture.As long as your picture is sharp a picture of around 800 X 800 pixels will be fine for net images
__________________

ICom Pro3

All posts are my own opinion and my opinion only.

"The clock of life is wound but once, and no man has the power to tell just when the hands will stop. Now is the only time you actually own the time, Place no faith in time, for the clock may soon be still for ever."
Good Judgement comes from experience,experience comes from Bad Judgement,.Buy quality, cry once; buy cheap, cry again and again.

www.mc0yad.club

Second in command CEO and left handed watch winder
padi56 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21 June 2007, 11:34 PM   #6
Gedanken
"TRF" Member
 
Gedanken's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Real Name: Sir
Location: Melbourne
Watch: F-series SD
Posts: 8,589
Chad, it's pretty simple to build a lightbox. All you need is a box, some white paper and a lamp. It really is just as easy as this:



As Eddie said, be wary of reflections, but the good thing is that most Rolex crystals are flat, so it's easy to offset the angle to eliminate reflections.

Take a shot ax max resolution, crop the photo and then resize the image to a max of 800X800 pixels - I just take the longer side of the photo and set it to 800. That's all there is to it.
__________________
You buy a Casio to make sure you're on time; you wear a Rolex because you don't have to be on time.
Gedanken is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22 June 2007, 12:34 AM   #7
ohlins
"TRF" Member
 
ohlins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Singapore
Watch: Rolex
Posts: 1,213
my lightbox....

__________________

the hype is true. a crown for every achievement.
visit my audio and watch blog & how to use the rolex comfort link?
ohlins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22 June 2007, 12:49 AM   #8
mikey
"TRF" Member
 
mikey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: USA
Watch: Oysterdate 6694
Posts: 2,713
I really like this post. This is very helpful advice and information. My problem is that if I go this far to learn how to take great pics of my Rolex will make me become a photographer. I am not looking for a career change.
mikey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22 June 2007, 12:58 AM   #9
Arby
"TRF" Member
 
Arby's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Real Name: Ron
Location: NJ
Posts: 726
I also use adobe photoshop to resize and adjust the levels as a final touch-up. (My 10MP camera likes to make an extremely large image.) Then I save it using the "save to web" option to lower the amount of memory to view the picture on a webpage while keeping the quality of the image as high as possible.
Arby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22 June 2007, 01:03 AM   #10
Tools
TRF Moderator & 2024 SubLV41 Patron
 
Tools's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Real Name: Larry
Location: Mojave Desert
Watch: GMT's
Posts: 43,514
I use this set up.

I photograph OTHER peoples watches at 100 meters.


Tools is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 22 June 2007, 01:14 AM   #11
Arby
"TRF" Member
 
Arby's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Real Name: Ron
Location: NJ
Posts: 726
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tools View Post
I use this set up.

I photograph OTHER peoples watches at 100 meters.


Geez, with that lens you can focus on a mouses' gonads a 1/4 mile away.
Arby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22 June 2007, 03:13 AM   #12
globalphotographic
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Changes a lot
Posts: 75
Hi.

I'm a freelance travel photographer and work for Getty Images / Lonely Planet.

I don't deal in macro shots anymore, which is what you need macro meaning 1:1, one inch on real life - one on sensor. But this is what you want:

1: A DSLR with a true macro like Canon 100mm f/2.8 would be preferable, combined with a macro flash.
2; cheaper: use a decent digital compact, you'll need a tripod, try to check for bad reflects on the screen, they'll mess up light meetering givin a darkish image, use a decent digital compact with a good macro- never accept less than 1:3 macro when buying or your watch will be very very small. Use a high f-number if you know what the means (big depth of field - or everything in focus)

Sincerely Sune
http://www.globalphotographic.net

Last edited by globalphotographic; 22 June 2007 at 03:21 AM.. Reason: unfinished post posted by mistake
globalphotographic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22 June 2007, 03:29 AM   #13
globalphotographic
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Changes a lot
Posts: 75
If you really want to go nuts here's a photo 1:5 I took using the combo below

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/re.../mp-e-65.shtml


--Sune
Attached Images
 
globalphotographic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22 June 2007, 03:33 AM   #14
Uncle-AJ
"TRF" Member
 
Uncle-AJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Real Name: Adrian
Location: Bolton, UK.
Watch: Daytona 116520
Posts: 6,844
Quote:
Originally Posted by globalphotographic View Post
Hi.

I'm a freelance travel photographer and work for Getty Images / Lonely Planet.

I don't deal in macro shots anymore, which is what you need macro meaning 1:1, one inch on real life - one on sensor. But this is what you want:

1: A DSLR with a true macro like Canon 100mm f/2.8 would be preferable, combined with a macro flash.
2; cheaper: use a decent digital compact, you'll need a tripod, try to check for bad reflects on the screen, they'll mess up light meetering givin a darkish image, use a decent digital compact with a good macro- never accept less than 1:3 macro when buying or your watch will be very very small. Use a high f-number if you know what the means (big depth of field - or everything in focus)

Sincerely Sune
http://www.globalphotographic.net
I just checked out some of your pictures Sune, very impressive.
__________________
A man with a watch knows what time it is. A man with two watches is never sure.........Segal's Law

Member #10
Uncle-AJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22 June 2007, 03:33 AM   #15
Tools
TRF Moderator & 2024 SubLV41 Patron
 
Tools's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Real Name: Larry
Location: Mojave Desert
Watch: GMT's
Posts: 43,514
Great shot Sune.

Puts a whole new meaning on "in your face".

Tools is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 22 June 2007, 03:56 AM   #16
globalphotographic
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Changes a lot
Posts: 75
Thanks AJ / Larry.

Another link to macro photography including watc specific advice from Tamron so-so lens manufacturer.

http://www.tamron.com/lenses/macrotips.asp#watch

Scroll down one-two pages "good old mechanical watch"

--Sune

Last edited by globalphotographic; 22 June 2007 at 03:56 AM.. Reason: missing link, pal
globalphotographic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22 June 2007, 04:15 AM   #17
JJ Irani
Fondly Remembered
 
JJ Irani's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Real Name: JJ
Location: Auckland, NZ
Watch: ALL SOLD!!
Posts: 74,319
Great camera work, Sune!!
__________________
Words fail me in expressing my utmost thanks to ALL of you for this wonderful support during my hour of need!!

I firmly believe that my time on planet earth is NOT yet up!! I shall fight this to the very end.......and WIN!!
JJ Irani is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22 June 2007, 06:25 PM   #18
Andad
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
Andad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Real Name: Eddie
Location: Australia
Watch: A few.
Posts: 37,527
Quote:
Originally Posted by globalphotographic View Post
Hi.

I'm a freelance travel photographer and work for Getty Images / Lonely Planet.

I don't deal in macro shots anymore, which is what you need macro meaning 1:1, one inch on real life - one on sensor. But this is what you want:

1: A DSLR with a true macro like Canon 100mm f/2.8 would be preferable, combined with a macro flash.
2; cheaper: use a decent digital compact, you'll need a tripod, try to check for bad reflects on the screen, they'll mess up light meetering givin a darkish image, use a decent digital compact with a good macro- never accept less than 1:3 macro when buying or your watch will be very very small. Use a high f-number if you know what the means (big depth of field - or everything in focus)

Sincerely Sune
http://www.globalphotographic.net
Hi Sune,

I don't have F-stop settings on my Sony N1 (well not that I can find in the menu). If I change the ISO setting from auto to its highest setting of 200 (choices are auto-64 -100 or 200) would I expect a digital camera to close down the iris (to give me more depth of field) or reduce the shutter speed (which would not change the depth of field)?
I hope I have asked this correctly?

eddie
__________________
E

Andad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22 June 2007, 08:58 PM   #19
Uncle-AJ
"TRF" Member
 
Uncle-AJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Real Name: Adrian
Location: Bolton, UK.
Watch: Daytona 116520
Posts: 6,844
Quote:
Originally Posted by directioneng View Post
Hi Sune,

I don't have F-stop settings on my Sony N1 (well not that I can find in the menu). If I change the ISO setting from auto to its highest setting of 200 (choices are auto-64 -100 or 200) would I expect a digital camera to close down the iris (to give me more depth of field) or reduce the shutter speed (which would not change the depth of field)?
I hope I have asked this correctly?

eddie
Eddie,

According to this review, there is a capability to set the aperture. Have another look through the manual for manual settings.

http://www.cameras.co.uk/details/sony-dsc-n1.cfm

Adrian.
__________________
A man with a watch knows what time it is. A man with two watches is never sure.........Segal's Law

Member #10
Uncle-AJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22 June 2007, 09:12 PM   #20
Andad
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
Andad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Real Name: Eddie
Location: Australia
Watch: A few.
Posts: 37,527
thanks Adrian.
__________________
E

Andad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22 June 2007, 09:38 PM   #21
roadcarver
"TRF" Member
 
roadcarver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Real Name: Vernon
Location: C-a-n-a-d-a
Watch: 16600
Posts: 5,641
Hi Chad,

I haven't setup a light box yet, but I usually use natural ligh as it works best since flash usually cause unncessary reflections. In leiu of the light box, I setup two seperate light sources (white light) using those flexible desk lamps and jus angle it so that the shadows are cancelled out.

I then use a background drop cloth to give it a nice background. I also use macro seting and use PS to crop it.

With macro photos a steady hand or a tripod will be most useful to get sharp photos.
__________________
I'm just a cook...
roadcarver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23 June 2007, 01:49 AM   #22
globalphotographic
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Changes a lot
Posts: 75
Hi Eddie.

If you increase ISO less light is needed, and an automatic camera would adjust to a smaller aperture (smaller iris = larger f-number) giving you a wider depth of field but its going to increase the shutter speed as well with no effect on sharpnes if on tripod.

However you want to avoid increasing iso due to grains / noise becomming rapidly excessive above ISO 100.

-> So take some time to dig up the aperture setting, turn to highes F-number, use a tripod or self release, turn down iso. Photos in artifical light turns out yellowish though, so corrects for this if possible on camera (another very long story about RAW-files could be posted here, I'll refrain :-)

Good luck!

Sincerely
--Sune
Attached Images
 
globalphotographic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23 June 2007, 01:51 AM   #23
globalphotographic
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Changes a lot
Posts: 75
Quote:
Originally Posted by JJ Irani View Post
Great camera work, Sune!!
Thanks JJ
globalphotographic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23 June 2007, 04:14 AM   #24
jhelms
"TRF" Member
 
jhelms's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: GA, USA
Watch: SS Sub / SS DJ
Posts: 221
Sune, awesome pics and great links.

Can you recommend something for me? I have a Nikon D200 with the 18-200 (3.5-5.6) VR Nikkor lens. I'm learning a lot and want to gradually ease into being able to do some neat macro shots, which this lens won't handle.

The vast majority of my consumer-only shot making will be done with the 18-200, but is there an inexpensive good 'starter' macro that you would point me towards? It would be used very rarely. Is it a good idea to make sure a macro lens has VR of some sort?

So far, my Sony HC7 High-Def camcorder actually seems to take 'ok' macro shots, but I really want to use the D200.

Thanks - hope this doesn't 'hijack' the thread, it looks like a great overall discussion of macro pics, and I know several of us on the board have Nikon DSLR's.
__________________
His - SS Submariner Date
Hers - SS Oyster Date, Blue Dial
"SS Daytona Waiting List" Member NO LONGER!
jhelms is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23 June 2007, 04:43 AM   #25
globalphotographic
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Changes a lot
Posts: 75
Cheapest Nikon Macro:

NIKKOR AF 60/2,8D MICRO at around 250$ buy at B&H in N.Y.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...Autofocus.html

For watches it'd be the best since 60mm means you'll
1) get it checp
2) have a great depth of field which the 105mm or more wouldn't lend you
3) don't need more zoom since watches wont escape as you approach :-)

You've got a nice camera, it needs decent tires - like the 60mm f/2.8 macro

A new world of macro watches will appear!!

Have fun

--Sune
globalphotographic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10 May 2008, 10:44 PM   #26
artbypaul
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Real Name: Paul
Location: Oklahoma City
Watch: Rolex
Posts: 411
Awesome post! Thanks for the great info!

Paul
artbypaul is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11 May 2008, 03:39 AM   #27
jmjm
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Real Name: John Kim
Location: Cerriros, CA
Watch: Blue Submariner TT
Posts: 380
I got turned off to photography when everything went digital after I spent $$ building up my Canon USM collection with EOS 5 body.

Now, after many years of just using a Point & Shoot Digital Elph, I have my tail in between my legs and crawling back to Canon to look for a DSLR body.

Since I do not want to Spend $$$$ for something that will be outdated in a few years, I am considering the Rebel xti.

Any comments?
jmjm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11 May 2008, 03:51 AM   #28
perryj
"TRF" Member
 
perryj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: USA
Watch: Rolex, Swatch
Posts: 952
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmjm View Post
I got turned off to photography when everything went digital after I spent $$ building up my Canon USM collection with EOS 5 body.

Now, after many years of just using a Point & Shoot Digital Elph, I have my tail in between my legs and crawling back to Canon to look for a DSLR body.

Since I do not want to Spend $$$$ for something that will be outdated in a few years, I am considering the Rebel xti.

Any comments?
I love my Canon 40D and that's coming from a "Ex" Nikon guy
perryj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11 May 2008, 04:15 AM   #29
BigHat
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Real Name: Matt
Location: Arlington, VA
Watch: Lange One MP
Posts: 4,043
Quote:
Originally Posted by globalphotographic View Post
Hi.

I'm a freelance travel photographer and work for Getty Images / Lonely Planet.

I don't deal in macro shots anymore, which is what you need macro meaning 1:1, one inch on real life - one on sensor. But this is what you want:

1: A DSLR with a true macro like Canon 100mm f/2.8 would be preferable, combined with a macro flash.
2; cheaper: use a decent digital compact, you'll need a tripod, try to check for bad reflects on the screen, they'll mess up light meetering givin a darkish image, use a decent digital compact with a good macro- never accept less than 1:3 macro when buying or your watch will be very very small. Use a high f-number if you know what the means (big depth of field - or everything in focus)

Sincerely Sune
http://www.globalphotographic.net
So glad to read this. After discussing with Jocke, I just bought that Canon 100mm f.2.8. Tired of the "your pics are too small or blurry" remarks.
Now I need to check on the macro flash you mention. Thanks for weighing in with your expertise.
BigHat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11 May 2008, 05:40 AM   #30
SPACE-DWELLER
"TRF" Member
 
SPACE-DWELLER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Real Name: Bo
Location: Denmark
Watch: Rolex, of course!
Posts: 22,436
Great thread!

Went straight to my bookmarks!
__________________
With kind regards, Bo

LocTite 221: The Taming Of The Screw...
SPACE-DWELLER is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

My Watch LLC

WatchesOff5th

DavidSW Watches

Takuya Watches

OCWatches

Asset Appeal

Wrist Aficionado


*Banners Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.





Copyright ©2004-2024, The Rolex Forums. All Rights Reserved.

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Rolex is a registered trademark of ROLEX USA. The Rolex Forums is not affiliated with ROLEX USA in any way.