Count Duckula
New member
going for 20 posts 
Incidentally, you still haven\'t told me what the tree is
Incidentally, you still haven\'t told me what the tree is
AAARGH!! VENTING MY SPLEEN!!!
- Thread starter nejoho
- Start date
Cerridwyn1st
New member
Tree
It\'s one of those things you buy in big bunches at a craft store. Not sure exactly what the plant is, but for a couple of bucks you get enough material to keep you busy for years. And it adds decor to your painting table.
It\'s one of those things you buy in big bunches at a craft store. Not sure exactly what the plant is, but for a couple of bucks you get enough material to keep you busy for years. And it adds decor to your painting table.
SENMM and NMM in general: Can of Worms
Well, let\'s just put it this way, I commented kindly on your Tau because it is an excellent paint job which demonstrates superior skill and diligence. That aside, the comment by \"Mr. Photoshop\" shows his ignorance, and his ignorance is, to me, much more common than it might seem.
Basically, I have always contended that NMM and its various sisters in style (such as the standard \"cartoony\" highlighting techniques) look flat. I understand that they are meant to create the illusion of depth, but the techniques themselves, if you are familiar enough with painting in general to detect them, are meant for two-dimensional objects.
My favorite example of this is the rackham job on the Wolfen Vestal. I had a drawn out argument with my friend, who insisted that the photo was not actually a miniature, but rather a 2-d painting of it. \"Mr Photoshop\" appears to have the same problem my friend did with the Vestal, and that is the problem I have with NMM.
Again, this is not meant to detract from your brilliant work on that Tau, and I will never say that NMM does not require a good degree of skill. My point here is simply that NMM and similar techniques are inherently 2-d styles, and detract from the natural \"3-d-ness\" of a miniature. In other words, the illusion backfires and, besides, there\'s no need for such an illusion on a non-flat medium such as a miniature
Well, let\'s just put it this way, I commented kindly on your Tau because it is an excellent paint job which demonstrates superior skill and diligence. That aside, the comment by \"Mr. Photoshop\" shows his ignorance, and his ignorance is, to me, much more common than it might seem.
Basically, I have always contended that NMM and its various sisters in style (such as the standard \"cartoony\" highlighting techniques) look flat. I understand that they are meant to create the illusion of depth, but the techniques themselves, if you are familiar enough with painting in general to detect them, are meant for two-dimensional objects.
My favorite example of this is the rackham job on the Wolfen Vestal. I had a drawn out argument with my friend, who insisted that the photo was not actually a miniature, but rather a 2-d painting of it. \"Mr Photoshop\" appears to have the same problem my friend did with the Vestal, and that is the problem I have with NMM.
Again, this is not meant to detract from your brilliant work on that Tau, and I will never say that NMM does not require a good degree of skill. My point here is simply that NMM and similar techniques are inherently 2-d styles, and detract from the natural \"3-d-ness\" of a miniature. In other words, the illusion backfires and, besides, there\'s no need for such an illusion on a non-flat medium such as a miniature
kittykat23uk
New member
I\'m glad thats all sorted now! Oh one thing I found was great for getting good photos: if you have a digicam, its well worth trying to fiddle around with the manual settings. I used to have it on automatic, and even with 3 lamps the pics kept coming out too dark. I spent about 1/2 an hour finding out what the best ISO settings were and the different exposure settings, and now I get much brighter images. Its a Sony dsc-P50, I have it set to Macro, ISO 100 and an exp of 2.0 I think..
Regards
Kat
Count Duckula
New member
Kitty, thanks for the advice.
Unfortunately I have a Kodak DX3600... it has no manual settings what-so-ever
I think i may need a better camera.
Unfortunately I have a Kodak DX3600... it has no manual settings what-so-ever
I think i may need a better camera.
kittykat23uk
New member
Ah,
in that case just try the best you can with the lighting you\'ve got and save up for a better camera!
Regards
Kat
in that case just try the best you can with the lighting you\'ve got and save up for a better camera!
Regards
Kat
Cerridwyn1st
New member
Originally posted by Count Duckula
Kitty, thanks for the advice.
Unfortunately I have a Kodak DX3600... it has no manual settings what-so-ever
I think i may need a better camera.
I\'ve got a Kodak DX240. I\'ll have to check to see if it has manual settings, that\'s a good idea, Kat.
After a bit of fooling around, I\'ve gotten to where I download the image directly from the camera into Photo Express (I think that\'s the name, anyway). I then use the software to change the brightness, contrast, and gamma balance of the picture.
Can\'t say I\'m an expert, but I expect with contiued practice I\'ll get better.
I\'ve also used the Kodak magnification lenes to get tighter shots of my minis.
You might try this, Count Duckula. Go to the Kodak website and look up some info on your camera. There may be some adaptors or camera tricks you can use that will help you in getting the kinds of images you want. This is the support link for your camera: http://www.kodak.com/global/en/service/products/ekn009396.jhtml?pq-path=742
I didn\'t have a manual for the DX240, but I was able to view it online at the Kodak site. That\'s also where I learned about the various attachements you can get for the camera and some extra info about the art of taking pictures of small items.
Hope this helps.
Mel
Count Duckula
New member
Cheers C!
I have the manual and the close-up lenses... I think the main problems are-
1) Lighting
2) getting the focus sensor thing to hit the target
I will read the manual again and follow that link to see if there is anything I can use.
I have the manual and the close-up lenses... I think the main problems are-
1) Lighting
2) getting the focus sensor thing to hit the target
I will read the manual again and follow that link to see if there is anything I can use.
Cerridwyn1st
New member
More camera stuff
I looked at your manual. Not sure it would be much help, since some of the stuff you would need to adjust can\'t be done on that camera. Sorry for giving you a bum steer on that one.
Try using the Gamma balance as well as contrast and brightness when adjusting your pix in PhotoShop. I\'m not sure exactly what a gamma filter does, but it has the effect of lightening the picture without bleaching it out the way adjusting the bightness will.
Can\'t say I don\'t have issues with focus myself. I noticed that on the Neferu that I have posted, the camera focused on the base, and left the figure itself looking fuzzy. Blast.
One thing that helps me is to put my fingers next to the fig. For one thing, I can see the quality of focus better on my finger than on the fig. And it gives the camera something big (relative to a figurine) to focus on.
I have software for my other camera that allows you to look at the image in your camera on your monitor before you snap the pix. I keep meaning to try the software with my Kodak, but haven\'t found the infamous \"round tuit\" to get it done.
Could you do that with PhotoShop? Capture the image as displayed on your screen from the camera? It would be much easier to see if the image was in focus if it was blown up on the screen, rather than looking at an itty bitty camera LCD.
I looked at your Chaos Terminator. You\'ve got a good focus on that guy, and it is a nice fig. The same set up with at least one more lamp would be a very nice pix.
BTW: Do you have a tripod?
Originally posted by Count Duckula
Cheers C!
I have the manual and the close-up lenses... I think the main problems are-
1) Lighting
2) getting the focus sensor thing to hit the target
I will read the manual again and follow that link to see if there is anything I can use.
I looked at your manual. Not sure it would be much help, since some of the stuff you would need to adjust can\'t be done on that camera. Sorry for giving you a bum steer on that one.
Try using the Gamma balance as well as contrast and brightness when adjusting your pix in PhotoShop. I\'m not sure exactly what a gamma filter does, but it has the effect of lightening the picture without bleaching it out the way adjusting the bightness will.
Can\'t say I don\'t have issues with focus myself. I noticed that on the Neferu that I have posted, the camera focused on the base, and left the figure itself looking fuzzy. Blast.
One thing that helps me is to put my fingers next to the fig. For one thing, I can see the quality of focus better on my finger than on the fig. And it gives the camera something big (relative to a figurine) to focus on.
I have software for my other camera that allows you to look at the image in your camera on your monitor before you snap the pix. I keep meaning to try the software with my Kodak, but haven\'t found the infamous \"round tuit\" to get it done.
Could you do that with PhotoShop? Capture the image as displayed on your screen from the camera? It would be much easier to see if the image was in focus if it was blown up on the screen, rather than looking at an itty bitty camera LCD.
I looked at your Chaos Terminator. You\'ve got a good focus on that guy, and it is a nice fig. The same set up with at least one more lamp would be a very nice pix.
BTW: Do you have a tripod?
K
klute_in_the_valute
Guest
If your having trouble with auto focus try a tripod or something thats holds your cam steady when shooting.Lack of light will mess it up also try a timer if it has one.The less chance of moving the cam when shooting the better.I got one of those mini flexi tripods and use the timer.Sharp every time.Also put a cloth over very bright lamps to get rid of the harsh light spots you get on the mini(day bulbs are better though)
Count Duckula
New member
Cerrid - Thats cool, thanks for taking the time to confirm my suspisions about my camera.
Thats a cool idea about using a reference item along side the mini to generate focus... I\'ll give that a try.
I \'ll have a go with the Gamma too, see what happens.
I\'m not sure if my camera will capture direct to software like that, again I\'ll give it a go.
I\'m glad you like the Terminator... but i must get more lamps, i know, i know
Klute, I have been meaning to get a tripod for ages. I use the timer when on hols etc, so I\'ll try that when I get the Tripod. I\'m sure it will help.
Thanks for the advice about softening the harsh light too!
Thanks again for all the advice everyone
Talking about that plant being a craft item... That is mine and my wifes second business, craft supplies... flowers, leaves etc for card makers. I am seeing what products we stock that might be of use to use Mini folk
Thats a cool idea about using a reference item along side the mini to generate focus... I\'ll give that a try.
I \'ll have a go with the Gamma too, see what happens.
I\'m not sure if my camera will capture direct to software like that, again I\'ll give it a go.
I\'m glad you like the Terminator... but i must get more lamps, i know, i know
Klute, I have been meaning to get a tripod for ages. I use the timer when on hols etc, so I\'ll try that when I get the Tripod. I\'m sure it will help.
Thanks for the advice about softening the harsh light too!
Thanks again for all the advice everyone
Talking about that plant being a craft item... That is mine and my wifes second business, craft supplies... flowers, leaves etc for card makers. I am seeing what products we stock that might be of use to use Mini folk
