RadioReference on Facebook   RadioReference on Twitter   RadioReference Blog
 

Go Back   The RadioReference.com Forums > Scanners, Receivers and Related Equipment Forums > Pictures Of Your Shack/Mobile Setup

Pictures Of Your Shack/Mobile Setup - Here you can post pictures of your shack, mobile, or portable setup for everyone to be envious of. Don't forget to rate the threads of good setups. Equipment installation questions belong here: Radio Equipment Installation

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #21 (permalink)  
Old 03-20-2008, 6:30 PM
Homeboys-Scanna's Avatar
Member
   
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,292
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wogggieee
...because of typos or grammatical errors. The same is true for photos, it does no good if people can't see see what is supposed to be in the picture.
LOL. I couldn't help it, but that's just too funny! But hey, given my grammar, I couldn't have said that better myself. Okay, all kidding aside, that's a good point.

Also, I did wanna thank everyone for all the kind werdz. I'm glad this got to be a sticky, so thanks tto the mods as well.

There's a LOT more I could add with all the photography stuff, and even my supposed knowledge is only introductory at best. Hopefully certain people will re-do their shack photos and post updated threads with their improved photos.

Last edited by Homeboys-Scanna; 03-21-2008 at 5:24 PM..
Reply With Quote
Sponsored links
  #22 (permalink)  
Old 04-25-2008, 6:59 PM
blantonl's Avatar
Founder and CEO
  RadioReference Database Admininstrator
Database Admin
Audio Feed Provider
Audio Feed Provider
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 8,848
Default

Homeboys-Scanna,

I consider this such a great posting and reference for all of the rest of us that I'm giving you a full 360 day premium subscription for the site.

What a great post!

Warm regards,

Lindsay
__________________
Lindsay C. Blanton III
CEO - RadioReference.com / Broadcastify
Facebook: RadioReference | Broadcastify | Twitter: @RadioReference
Reply With Quote
  #23 (permalink)  
Old 04-25-2008, 8:42 PM
Homeboys-Scanna's Avatar
Member
   
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,292
Thumbs up

Alright!! Thanks a lot for that. I didn't see that coming. Hopefully I'll have more spare time in a few months (whenever the ghastly CPA exam is finally done) to post a few more things with examples.

Thanks again.
Reply With Quote
  #24 (permalink)  
Old 04-25-2008, 9:16 PM
Member
  Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: N. Tex / S. Fla
Posts: 1,087
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blantonl
I consider this such a great posting and reference for all of the rest of us that I'm giving you a full 360 day premium subscription for the site.
Whoever posts a good grammar and spelling guide deserves a lifetime premium subscription!
__________________
"Man up and drill those holes!"
Reply With Quote
  #25 (permalink)  
Old 04-26-2008, 7:02 PM
lowboy654's Avatar
DB Admin Member
  RadioReference Database Admininstrator
Database Admin
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Northwest, WA
Posts: 2,218
Default

Very cool thanks for the lesson.
ken
__________________
If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice.
Ken
Data Admin
lowboy654@radioreference.com
Reply With Quote
Sponsored links
  #26 (permalink)  
Old 05-02-2008, 7:30 PM
Homeboys-Scanna's Avatar
Member
   
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,292
Arrow ISO Noise

ISO Noise

ISO stands for International Organization for Standardization but I've more commonly heard it called International Standards Organization. It refers to the sensitivity of camera film or a digital camera's sensor and is sometimes called "speed". The higher the ISO "speed" the more sensitive to light the film or digital camera sensor is, resulting in brighter photos. The lower the ISO, the lower the sensitivity is and the darker the images will be. I guess the
International Standards Organization does a lot of things, so why in the world this particular camera setting is called "ISO" is beyond me. Personally I would have simply called it brightness.

There is one big drawback with using too high of an ISO setting. It results in photos that have a grainy appearance like they have sand in them or like an old TV set getting a weak signal. This is referred to as noise, and the higher you set the ISO, the more noise you'll have in the photos. The first 2 images below were taken with an ISO of 80 and the next 2 photos were taken with an ISO of 800. (For some reason the Canon A710 IS camera doesn't seem to be saving the ISO setting in the EXIF data, so you'll just have to take my word for it. )









Clearly, the last 2 photos (with the much higher ISO of 800) are inferior in quality. Grainy noisy photos are a common thing I see in the forum once in a while (especially with cell phone camera shots - another reason to avoid cell phone cameras! ), so I thought I'd mention it here. ISO noise becomes less noticeable when the photo is resized to a smaller percentage, but it can still cause photos not to look as sharp and crisp as they would with a lower ISO.



If using the camera's auto mode, the camera might choose a high ISO in low-lighting conditions which will cause this graininess, so the more ambient lighting ( "ambient" = the normal light in the room/environment), the better. Any extra lamps, worklights, lanterns etc. that can be setup and used will help cause the camera to choose a lower ISO when in auto mode so that the photos won't be as noisy. This explains why people using auto mode on their cameras (or other auto settings on the dial such as "Portrait", "Landscape", or "Fireworks") sometimes get nasty grainy photos. Then again, there's plenty of times where with good lighting the auto mode works great and there's lots of nice shots on the forum to prove it.

Really, the best thing to do (in my opinion) is to shoot in full manual mode and use a tripod. This allows you to manually choose the ISO setting yourself so that it won't be too high and thus you won't get those sandy-looking photos of your scanners. With a tripod, you're free to use a slower shutter speed without camera shake blur, so that the picture won't come out too dark.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Camera Settings Are About Tradeoffs

Now that you know a bit about the 3 main camera settings that make up the exposure (shutter speed, aperture, & ISO), you can see with a little bit of trial and error in full manual mode how you must compensate for changing one setting, by having to then change another setting. Increasing the shutter speed makes for a less blurry photo when shooting handheld, but it also makes the picture come out darker. To then compensate for this and make the picture brighter, you could increase the ISO, but that might make for a noisier photo, -OR- you could open up the aperture (choose a lower f-number) to let in more light, but that may cause some objects at different distances not to appear in focus. Then again, if the lighting is too low to begin with, a faster shutter speed could cause the photo to come out completely black altogether so that you have no choice but to accept a little bit of blurriness due to camera shake.

It's all about tradeoffs and making decisions depending on what you're shooting, because there's a limit to how far the camera settings can be adjusted in any direction. You could literally be up until MIDNIGHT trying all the different combinations of settings. Even attaining an exposure value (EV) of a perfect -0- on the camera's exposure meter on the LCD display could still render an underexposed photo ("underexposed" = too dark) if the scanner is black in color or the desk has a dark wood color.


Thank God for auto mode!


Reply With Quote
  #27 (permalink)  
Old 05-02-2008, 9:28 PM
Homeboys-Scanna's Avatar
Member
   
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,292
Question Photography Quiz

Photography Quiz

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1.
Assuming no other camera settings are changed, which of the following statements about shutter speed is correct?

a.) A 1/160 shutter speed results in a brighter photo and has less blur due to camera shake than 1/125.
b.)
A 1/160 shutter speed results in a brighter photo and has more blur due to camera shake than 1/125.
c.) A 1/160 shutter speed results in a darker photo and has less blur due to camera shake than 1/125.
d.)
A 1/160 shutter speed results in a darker photo and has more blur due to camera shake than 1/125.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. When shooting in manual mode, an underexposed digital photo can best be compensated for by:

a.) Increasing the ISO and decreasing the f-number.
b.) Increasing the shutter speed and increasing the ISO.
c.) Stopping down the aperture and decreasing the shutter speed.
d.) Decreasing the ISO and opening up the aperture.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Of the following 4 photos, which one most likely was taken with the most stopped-down aperture (highest f-number) ?

a.)



b.)



c.)



d.)


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Solutions to be posted next weekend...



Last edited by tonsoffun; 06-07-2009 at 1:31 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #28 (permalink)  
Old 05-10-2008, 9:30 PM
Homeboys-Scanna's Avatar
Member
   
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,292
Arrow

Quiz Solutions

1. (c) The faster the shutter speed, the darker the photo will come out but the less camera shake blur there will be if you're shooting handheld. The higher the denominator number, the faster the shutter speed is, which gives the camera less time to collect light that is saved into the image, resulting in a darker photo. But the shorter timeframe of collecting light also reduces the amount of blurriness saved into the image as well.

Suppose you snap a photo of a running dog and the dog runs 3 feet during the time that the shutter is open, the camera will record and save 3 feet worth of blurriness into the photo. Now suppose you use a faster shutter speed and perhaps the dog only moves three-tenths of an inch during
the time that the shutter is open, now you'll only get 3/10 of an inch worth of blurriness.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. (a) Underexposed simply means the picture came out too dark, so to compensate for this in manual mode you have to adjust the settings to make it brighter. Increasing the ISO makes the camera sensor more sensitive to light, resulting in a brighter (but noisier) image. Decreasing the f-number means that you're opening up the aperture (widening the "iris" of the camera) which allows more light to hit the sensor making for a brighter picture.

Answer (b) is incorrect because increasing the shutter speed will make the picture come out even more underexposed. Letter (c) is wrong because "stopping down" the aperture means you are making the aperture smaller (narrowing the "iris" by increasing the f-number) which lets in less light further underexposing the photo. Letter (d) is incorrect since reducing the ISO setting makes the picture come out darker as well.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. (b) A more stopped-down aperture (higher f-number) causes various different distances of the subject to appear in better focus than wider apertures. Notice how in letter (d) only part of the weather radio appears to be in focus, but with letter (b) almost the entire radio looks in focus. This indicates that letter (b) was taken with a smaller aperture. Answer (a) is not the best answer because the photo is more underexposed with high ISO nose than anything, and letter (c) is also not the best answer because the entire photo is simply out of focus making it too hard to judge the depth-of-field.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bored Yet ?
__________________
"Copy, 132 and Bush, cover's code 3."

Last edited by Homeboys-Scanna; 05-10-2008 at 9:34 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #29 (permalink)  
Old 06-17-2008, 8:22 PM
Member
  Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Davenport,Fl.- home to me and the gators and the skeeters.
Posts: 1,315
Smile Homeboys-Scanna and others, thanks for the tips

on getting better quality photos for posting, and otherwise. I for one appreciate the tips and hopefully will use them soon. Tx again.
__________________
Freedom, a beautiful way of life.
Pro-107, Pro-44, Pro-94, Pro-2006, DX-440
YAESU FT-2900R, YAESU FT-101EE, RS HTX-202, ICOM IC-2AT, RS BTX-121, BAOFENG UV-5R
Reply With Quote
Sponsored links
  #30 (permalink)  
Old 08-13-2008, 6:10 PM
Homeboys-Scanna's Avatar
Member
   
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,292
Angry Dang It !!

It appears as though not all of my pictures are loading sometimes. Imageshack has a way of doing that for some reason. I'm gonna have to figure out something more reliable. After a certain timeframe, it looks like the forums don't let you edit old posts.
__________________
"Copy, 132 and Bush, cover's code 3."
Reply With Quote
  #31 (permalink)  
Old 08-27-2008, 7:06 AM
bezking's Avatar
Member
  RadioReference Database Admininstrator
Database Admin
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: On the Road
Posts: 2,900
Default

All of the images load for me...
__________________
"People are weird." --Captain Don Cragen
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Reply With Quote
  #32 (permalink)  
Old 08-27-2008, 6:12 PM
Homeboys-Scanna's Avatar
Member
   
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,292
Default

Okay, thanks. I re-uploaded the ones that were missing and put in a request to the mods to change it last week. Looks like it's working again, for now.
__________________
"Copy, 132 and Bush, cover's code 3."
Reply With Quote
  #33 (permalink)  
Old 12-28-2008, 12:53 PM
majoco's Avatar
Member
  Shack Photos
Shack photos
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 2,280
Default

If you want a pic of something small and reasonably flat, try laying it on the glass of your document scanner with a piece of black material behind it - works well!
Reply With Quote
  #34 (permalink)  
Old 05-23-2009, 7:51 PM
BaLa's Avatar
Member
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Butler, Mo (few days a month lol)
Posts: 1,522
Default

Why you delete teh Exif?

too much trouble...if I was going to post a pic on here..
I just use Auto, but Thanks for teh tips.


Auto - http://wiki.radioreference.com/index...Pro95TapPt.jpg FujiS3000
__________________
VFB Stuttgart Deutscher Meister 2006/2007
Uniden BCD436HP
RS Pro 92(b), 95, 96

Last edited by BaLa; 05-23-2009 at 7:55 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #35 (permalink)  
Old 06-27-2009, 5:53 PM
burner50's Avatar
The Third Variable
  RadioReference Database Admininstrator
Database Admin
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: NW Iowa
Posts: 2,459
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BaLa View Post
Why you delete teh Exif?

too much trouble...if I was going to post a pic on here..
I just use Auto, but Thanks for teh tips.


Auto - Image:Pro95TapPt.jpg - The RadioReference Wiki FujiS3000
Its fixed.

Anyone who sees broken images here, report the post and I'll contact Homeboys-Scanna and hopefully we can keep these images up... Apparently Imageshack is having some problems.
__________________
RadioReference.com Forums Moderator

burner50@radioreference.com
Reply With Quote
Sponsored links
  #36 (permalink)  
Old 04-17-2010, 2:29 PM
duchee's Avatar
Member
   
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Duluth,mn
Posts: 262
Default

i agree! keep up the great pics!
Reply With Quote
  #37 (permalink)  
Old 08-26-2011, 7:56 AM
burner50's Avatar
The Third Variable
  RadioReference Database Admininstrator
Database Admin
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: NW Iowa
Posts: 2,459
Default

For specific questions, please use the Photography forum.


Photography - The RadioReference.com Forums
__________________
RadioReference.com Forums Moderator

burner50@radioreference.com
Reply With Quote
  #38 (permalink)  
Old 09-22-2011, 12:17 PM
Completely Banned for the Greater Good
   
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: home
Posts: 76
Default

i have kodack camera/recoder so how do i set it to take both great pictures and videos
Reply With Quote
  #39 (permalink)  
Old 09-22-2011, 1:58 PM
JoeyC's Avatar
Member
   
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 3,365
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RES51CUE View Post
i have kodack camera/recoder so how do i set it to take both great pictures and videos
Did you even read the thread?
Go to the beginning of the thread and start reading.
If there were one setting to take great pictures and videos on any camera, we'd all be great photographers...
Reply With Quote
  #40 (permalink)  
Old 09-22-2011, 4:44 PM
Homeboys-Scanna's Avatar
Member
   
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,292
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RES51CUE View Post
i have kodack camera/recoder so how do i set it to take both great pictures and videos
This is probably a better question for a photography forum, but I would say just practice using the camera. Try to get familiar with all the settings, menus, etc..

Once you're familiar with the camera, try going through this thread a couple times. Good luck!
__________________
"Copy, 132 and Bush, cover's code 3."
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
sticky

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

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 On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 1:40 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
All information here is Copyright 2012 by RadioReference.com LLC and Lindsay C. Blanton III.Ad Management by RedTyger
Copyright 2015 by RadioReference.com LLC Privacy Policy  |  Terms and Conditions