Digital Photography question

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
A friend of mine has been told that formatting her digi camera memory card is more efficient than simply deleting the files as pictures can produce 'shadow' effects even after deletion.

Is this true
Sounds crap to me

Ste (Fuzzy), Saturday, 30 September 2006 14:22 (nineteen years ago)

Er, "shadow" effects? I don't know what this could mean in a digital context.

It may be more efficient because the card memory may become fragmented with multiple additions and deletions, leading to a slowing in response from the camera when it tries to write new images or when you switch between shooting mode and playback mode.

Michael Jones (MichaelJ), Saturday, 30 September 2006 14:38 (nineteen years ago)

well thats exactly what i was telling her, she says these 'guys' were professional photographers too. I think maybe mis communication between her and them probly. She seemed to think she'd get after images of deleted photos on her new phots. hmmm.

thanks btw

Ste (Fuzzy), Saturday, 30 September 2006 18:20 (nineteen years ago)

Most photogs I know format the card each time; it slightly shortens the lifespan of the card, but just deleting the files can do exactly what Michael says.

stet (stet), Saturday, 30 September 2006 18:32 (nineteen years ago)

She seemed to think she'd get after images of deleted photos on her new phots

Good plot device for a Japanese horror film.

Michael Jones (MichaelJ), Saturday, 30 September 2006 18:47 (nineteen years ago)

It kinda sounds like someone's misheard about the "memory effect" - digital camera users also suffer from this, but it's a description of what happens to rechargeable batteries in cameras. (recharging them before they're empty all the time causes their capacity to slowly diminish)

StanM (StanM), Saturday, 30 September 2006 19:39 (nineteen years ago)

NiMH and Li-ion batteries don't suffer from the memory effect nearly as much as yr old NiCd batteries though (Li-polymer not at all, AFAIK) and the former are far more common in cameras now.

(Mind you, the Li-ion battery in my Canon Ixus is only good for about 20-30 pics per cycle now, after about 100 recharge cycles. The cheapo replacement was no better than this from the off, so I'm kinda jealous of people with cameras that take AA alkalines - you can always buy a packet of Duracells when you're out and about, but I'm stuffed if my two batteries flake out).

Michael Jones (MichaelJ), Saturday, 30 September 2006 20:52 (nineteen years ago)

four years pass...

so, we have this relatively inexpensive point and shoot digital camera in my house. and i'd like to give taking some rad photos w/ it a shot. (no idea how long i'll keep w/ this tbrr)

do y'all who at least kinda sorta actually know what you're doing have any pro tips re what i can do to take actually dope pictures with this kinda thing? can i take some photos that are kinda neat looking w/ this or am i fucked w/o a camera that uses real film or a canon 5d mark ii deal?

i don't really know what i'm doing -- advice plz

(thankig y'all in advance)

markers, Tuesday, 7 June 2011 07:04 (fifteen years ago)

also, i don't have an iphone (or any smartphone), so i can't use instagram or stuff like that that makes it ridiculously easy to make yr photos look "arty"

markers, Tuesday, 7 June 2011 07:11 (fifteen years ago)

you can totally take good photos with a point and shoot imo. on my old little canon there was a "digital macro" setting...no flash and would focus in well on things at close range but also worked well for regular pictures. it was actually really helpful to figure out how to take a decent picture with the constraints of a crappy camera before starting in buying expensive equipment. usually i'd just flick the contrast up a bit once i got them on the computer.

rent, Tuesday, 7 June 2011 07:54 (fifteen years ago)

not sure i get the question. you can take good pictures with almost any camera, you just have to work with the limitations - and frame your shots well. helps to be able to control aperture size and shutter speed, but you probably can't do that. if you're taking night or indoor photos with light sources in the background, you can create interesting effects by shaking or rotating the camera while shooting.

contenderizer, Tuesday, 7 June 2011 08:06 (fifteen years ago)

'slow synch flash' or similar is a good effect for night/indoors available on some point n shoots. long exposure + flash at the end so you get trippy light trails and a sharp foreground.

England's banh mi army (ledge), Tuesday, 7 June 2011 09:02 (fifteen years ago)

^ yeah, that's what i was trying (and failing) to describe. aka rear curtain sync.

contenderizer, Tuesday, 7 June 2011 09:26 (fifteen years ago)

seven months pass...

hi i borrowed a t2i from work and for some reason neither photoshop nor the canon software (digital professional photographer) will open the cr2 files from the memory card. i can however open them in preview/iphoto and the images show up in "cover view." not a big deal really but what gives

max, Sunday, 8 January 2012 13:01 (fourteen years ago)

photoshop prob needs an updated adobe camera raw. not sure why canon's software won't open the files. not sure how to update adobe camera raw either, but if you ask michael jones or stet they would probably know. sorry I can't help more

bob loblaw people (dayo), Sunday, 8 January 2012 13:04 (fourteen years ago)

yeah thats what i figured but camera raw is up to date

max, Sunday, 8 January 2012 13:08 (fourteen years ago)

& i figure the files arent corrupt since i can see them and open them with other apps

max, Sunday, 8 January 2012 13:08 (fourteen years ago)

maybe it would work if you copied the files to your computer? idk

bob loblaw people (dayo), Sunday, 8 January 2012 13:22 (fourteen years ago)

tried that

max, Sunday, 8 January 2012 13:25 (fourteen years ago)

im just opening them in preview and converting them to TIFF

wish i had any clue about photography. it seems hard!

max, Sunday, 8 January 2012 13:25 (fourteen years ago)

so many settings on this camera!! all my photos came out yellow

max, Sunday, 8 January 2012 13:26 (fourteen years ago)

that's probably a white balance issue

you can actually fix that w/ no image quality degradation in photoshop... if you could open the files in photoshop

bob loblaw people (dayo), Sunday, 8 January 2012 13:38 (fourteen years ago)

you might try downloading a trial version of lightroom and seeing if that opens it

bob loblaw people (dayo), Sunday, 8 January 2012 13:39 (fourteen years ago)

can i do it with the tiffs?

max, Sunday, 8 January 2012 13:39 (fourteen years ago)

whoa i just did "auto color" and it made that shit look way better

max, Sunday, 8 January 2012 13:40 (fourteen years ago)

can i make blurry photos not blurry

max, Sunday, 8 January 2012 13:40 (fourteen years ago)

yah http://www.lytro.com/

bob loblaw people (dayo), Sunday, 8 January 2012 13:42 (fourteen years ago)

dont be fresh with me

max, Sunday, 8 January 2012 13:44 (fourteen years ago)

which vers of PS are you using <-- imprtnt

Waxahachie Swap (Jimmy The Mod Awaits The Return Of His Beloved), Sunday, 8 January 2012 15:51 (fourteen years ago)

cs5

max, Sunday, 8 January 2012 16:12 (fourteen years ago)

well that's not the answer I was expecting

Waxahachie Swap (Jimmy The Mod Awaits The Return Of His Beloved), Sunday, 8 January 2012 16:29 (fourteen years ago)

Have you tried opening them in Bridge?

Darin, Monday, 9 January 2012 04:05 (fourteen years ago)

thirteen years pass...

So... I ordered a cheap chinese infrared filter on ebay for my fujifilm X10 camera.. and it's completely black, i.e. no light passing through it

I installed it on the camera and took a couple snaps and they're just pure black.. did I get ripped off? Guessing I did

Andy the Grasshopper, Thursday, 3 April 2025 19:24 (one year ago)

Yeah that shouldn’t be. Does it have anything printed on the side? It could be a solar filter that was sent by mistake.

Its big ball chunky time (Jimmy The Mod Awaits The Return Of His Beloved), Thursday, 3 April 2025 19:26 (one year ago)

it says 'IR 950 52mm'... the box says infrared filter

ah well it was like $17 with free shipping from China.. I guess you get what you pay for

Andy the Grasshopper, Thursday, 3 April 2025 19:34 (one year ago)

I went to look directly at the sun (not super wise) and I could see a faint pink spot, so I guess it's passing a little bit of light

Andy the Grasshopper, Thursday, 3 April 2025 19:36 (one year ago)

your digicam already has an ir filter over the sensor

, Thursday, 3 April 2025 20:00 (one year ago)

this one for example says it has a 256x filter factor or 8 stops, which means your exposure on an unmodified digicam would have to be 8 stops slower than an equivalent shot without the filter https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1522585-REG/ice_ice_950_77_77mm_hb950_infrared_filter.html/reviews

in other words i think you got the right filter that’s just how they are.

, Thursday, 3 April 2025 20:05 (one year ago)

I cranked up the ISO to 3200 and was able to get a very faint image of the street outside... there's also a special nighttime mode, maybe I'll try it with that

Andy the Grasshopper, Thursday, 3 April 2025 20:07 (one year ago)

don’t crank the iso crank up the shutter speed. you probably need at least 1 second maybe more

, Thursday, 3 April 2025 20:12 (one year ago)

ah okay, thanks... I'll bust out the tripod

Andy the Grasshopper, Thursday, 3 April 2025 20:12 (one year ago)

basically your digicam is designed to record in the visible light spectrum (380-780nm) and has a filter over the sensor to block out uv and infrared spectrums (<380nm and >780nm). the filter you bought is designed to block out visible light and to only allow ir light at 950nm to pass throgh, hence why it looks black. but your digicam sensor is blocking the 950nm light. so you need to crank up the exposure time.

your alternative is to send your digicam to get an ir conversion done from a company like kolari where they remove the ir filter and put something more ir-photogsaphy suited in its place

, Thursday, 3 April 2025 20:15 (one year ago)

I was just curious about infrared but didn't wanna spend $70 on a filter, so I bought a cheapo to check it out... I'll do some more experiments with longer exposures, but if it looks like shit I'll just stash the thing away

Andy the Grasshopper, Thursday, 3 April 2025 20:17 (one year ago)

Also if ur digital just… photoshop it

Its big ball chunky time (Jimmy The Mod Awaits The Return Of His Beloved), Thursday, 3 April 2025 20:22 (one year ago)

Yeah, this sounds like a neutral density filter, but perhaps IR filters basically act as big stoppers anyway (or it’s an IRND filter). So, long exposure, manual focus if you can, and you might get some interesting results.

Michael Jones, Thursday, 3 April 2025 20:23 (one year ago)

I found a video that looks pretty helpful

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9u0z5oUzWCQ

Andy the Grasshopper, Thursday, 3 April 2025 20:31 (one year ago)

the filter he uses blocks light up to 720nm, however your filter blocks up to 950nm

, Thursday, 3 April 2025 20:38 (one year ago)

also i don’t think your fuji x10 has the xtrans sensor that his fuji does

, Thursday, 3 April 2025 20:42 (one year ago)

yeah, I'll probably just mess around with the manual mode and see if I can get something close

Andy the Grasshopper, Thursday, 3 April 2025 20:47 (one year ago)

One curiosity is that a lot of older digital cameras had very weak infrared blocking filters. I used to own a Fuji S1 Pro, and with a visible-light-blocking, infrared-passing filter over the lens I would take infrared images at ISO 1600 handheld:
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjoGV2_eG_WQE4qMY0N2WfBcs7KwxYNMAlkYbG339iFRusKru9wtnWVmRAG0k-zwEIYcEOEumTmJS_KnC9x_ksMuzOK2PINEryEX8cW72CAOMiKduifC40hJUAjZUpNwvVf8pRLUAOJTCM/s1600/DSCF0205.jpg
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiQgP-IbsAlK2OcWPQinUZhaulzDOa3L6LWncC9X-je3sx-_WdKvCwIuGP_IHxZzHstVmN6NbUuFTCV7YoaoI71qmdGUzvuH7QzhaizJ6ULAmrT5y-5L6lQE0C5tmRg7giA0ZpcHsVRHAI/s1600/DSCF0226.jpg

The old Kodak DCS and Sigma SD models actually had unscrewable infrared filters. Oftentimes black fabrics would turn out purple because of the reflected infrared confusing the camera. Even modern cameras let in a little bit of infrared, but you need very long exposures.

Ashley Pomeroy, Saturday, 5 April 2025 17:01 (one year ago)

Oh, ping. Ping ping ping! That should be:
https://i.imgur.com/TBoJvlr.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/ecw5DIS.jpg

Ashley Pomeroy, Saturday, 5 April 2025 17:04 (one year ago)

well I found some great infrared photos online shot on the Fujifilm X10, but I haven't had any luck with the filter

Unfortunately, if you try to lower the shutter speed, this model will also automatically lower the ISO to 100, which is annoying; and alas, there is no bulb setting for the shutter.. It would be great to raise the ISO and lower the shutter speed but I haven't had any luck. There's also obviously issues with the auto focus when you put on a black filter!

I might give it another try but so far I just get a dark black nothingness, like the depths of my soul

Andy the Grasshopper, Monday, 7 April 2025 23:47 (one year ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.