50mm lens – field of view & subject width/distance

2s delay - probably OK but only just, it's surprising how long the wobble lasts. You are not pressed for time, use the 10s delay, it might help. A cable release would be even better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crashbangwallop

. . . I won't post any of my photos up, there seems little point just now, but I will share my Artwork blog, http://keithepps.blogspot.com/ . . .

---

Interesting comment and very interesting choice.

In the spirit of offering assistance with your technique I looked at, at least 12 of your images: none have EXIF data and all are low resolution.

I have spent a great deal of time making forensic image files of artworks, for insurance purposes: in essence my advice in this thread has primarily been based on that experience.

I think it is a good idea not buying a new lens at the moment.

Good luck with your endeavours.

WW

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chataignier

2s delay - probably OK but only just, it's surprising how long the wobble lasts. You are not pressed for time, use the 10s delay, it might help. A cable release would be even better.

---

I am instantly convinced. A brand -new cable release is on its way as I write (a very reasonable £7.50 on Amazon). That AND the 10s delay should solve any stability issues

Except, of course, that my tripod is a real cheapy, and I had my doubts about it even with light cameras. With the arrival of the much heavier camera, it does now need to be replaced with something a bit more sturdy and steady. Which I can happily do with the cash I wouldv'e spent on a new lense. Will be researching over the next couple of weeks.
This is just like what happens when you buy a new piece of Hi-Fi – everything else needs upgraded to match it...

Cheers for the tips :)

That's a very interesting slice of expertise you have there WW! It prompts me to ask whether you were able to photograph the artworks in the studio, or if they had to be recorded in situ – which I imagine sometimes introduced some interesting problems.

Re: The photos on the blog. I'm not surprised that the data has been eradicated – the blogsite re-formats (?) everything that's sent up to a maximum size and (I assume) a standard resolution. I'd love to display real, full-fat images of my work there, but it's not possible. Other painters set up their own sites, but I'm using the blog as an information point rather than as a shop window. I quite like the blog format, and there are no fees involved at all.

If it's any help, the last image up on the blog (at time of writing) – Dog Altishevo – was taken as a CR2 RAW, converted to TIFF, photoshopped to match the actual painting as close as possible visually, then saved as JPEG 3800x3166 @350dpi. The CR2 taken with the wee Canon G10, the Picasa data of which (I think) I have here - Lens: 6-30mm/3.5-8, Exposure time 1/6s, f/5, ISO 80, Aperture 4.66, probably from about 1.5m away. Of which only the f number and ISO, were consciously selected by me. Those online images are now historical though, and may not address my current question, which happily, and with all the advice I'm getting here, may soon be behind me

Thank for your interest and best wishes, Bill, and I have to say that I'm very relieved not to be buying a new lens

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crashbangwallop

. . . were [you] able to photograph the artworks in the studio, or if they had to be recorded in situ . . .

---

Both, however the majority were in situ because some owners were reticent to have the work(s) removed and/or their insurance cover didn't allow it without issuing a cover note as an addition to the policy whilst in transit and at another location.

You’re welcome to my interest in your quest, IMO, it’s a shame, and probably a loss, that it didn’t develop.

WW