Focussing in the dark.

"Christopher Pollard" wrote in message
...
It's Christmas, almost, and therefore my house is lit up like, erm, a
Christmas
tree. So I decided to take a photograph of it. Tried a few different
settings
but they all seemed out of focus.
At least I think it's a focus problem, it doesn't look like camera shake.
www.xmastree.34sp.com/images/pc140023.jpg
See what you think.

The camera was on a tripod, and I used the timer. It's a Olympus C-750,
and it
was in program mode, auto focus. It thought it had focussed correctly, the
green
indicator was steady.
That shot IIRC was f2.8 1/1.6. I was also using a wide angle adaptor, but
the
result was the same without it.

I tried the manual focus, but it's very difficult to use. The centre of
the
display shows an enlarged version of the centre of the image, but there's
no
noticeable change from infinity until I get to about 4 ft.

(comments about the 'tastefulness' of the lights will be ignored. It was
my
wife's idea)

--
Chris Pollard

It looks to me to be an over-exposure of the lights. Look past the lights
at the building, which is much darker. That part isn't much - if at all -
out of focus.

The image has a very large range of intensity. Try to fill in the
background with a floodlight, then reduce the exposure.

Christopher Pollard wrote:

[it looks weird]

Manually focus the camera. Try backing off on the exposure, as it will
reduce any tendency to bloom. If this improves the situation, a
double-exposure may be in order: take one with the lights on and
expose for the lights (you'll have almost no background, but that's
ok). Take another with the lights off (you might want to underexpose
this to simulate 'dark', but experiment). Merge the two (or more)
images together in PhotoSlop.

[wife's idea]
[...]
CG Internet caf=E9, Tagum City, Philippines
Filipinos + christmas ... well, let's just say it isn't normal. ;-)

Christopher Pollard wrote:
It's Christmas, almost, and therefore my house is lit up like, erm, a Christmas
tree. So I decided to take a photograph of it. Tried a few different settings
but they all seemed out of focus.
At least I think it's a focus problem, it doesn't look like camera shake.
www.xmastree.34sp.com/images/pc140023.jpg
See what you think.

The camera was on a tripod, and I used the timer. It's a Olympus C-750, and it
was in program mode, auto focus. It thought it had focussed correctly, the green
indicator was steady.
That shot IIRC was f2.8 1/1.6. I was also using a wide angle adaptor, but the
result was the same without it.

I tried the manual focus, but it's very difficult to use. The centre of the
display shows an enlarged version of the centre of the image, but there's no
noticeable change from infinity until I get to about 4 ft.

(comments about the 'tastefulness' of the lights will be ignored. It was my
wife's idea)


You have the classic problem of trying to photograph a scene with WAY
too much contrast.
Try shooting near dusk. Take a picture every few minutes before sunset.
At some point you will be able to get the right ratio of ambient light
to decoration lights. Also your camera wil be able to focus more
accurately with more ambient light.
Most cameras are notoriously bad at focusing in the dark.
However, I don't think your focus is off that much. It was obviousy a
long exposure and the lights probably moved a little bit in the wind.
Bob Williams

On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 11:13:08 -0800, Bob Williams
wrote:

Most cameras are notoriously bad at focusing in the dark.
However, I don't think your focus is off that much. It was obviousy a
long exposure and the lights probably moved a little bit in the wind.

...and his house must have moved too. Strong winds there I guess.

--
Owamanga!

On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 11:13:08 -0800, Bob Williams
wrote:

Most cameras are notoriously bad at focusing in the dark.
However, I don't think your focus is off that much. It was obviousy a
long exposure and the lights probably moved a little bit in the wind.

...and his house must have moved too. Strong winds there I guess.

--
Owamanga!

"Christopher Pollard" wrote in message
...
It's Christmas, almost, and therefore my house is lit up like, erm, a
Christmas
tree. So I decided to take a photograph of it. Tried a few different
settings
but they all seemed out of focus.
At least I think it's a focus problem, it doesn't look like camera shake.
www.xmastree.34sp.com/images/pc140023.jpg
See what you think.

The camera was on a tripod, and I used the timer. It's a Olympus C-750,
and it
was in program mode, auto focus. It thought it had focussed correctly, the
green
indicator was steady.
That shot IIRC was f2.8 1/1.6. I was also using a wide angle adaptor, but
the
result was the same without it.

I tried the manual focus, but it's very difficult to use. The centre of
the
display shows an enlarged version of the centre of the image, but there's
no
noticeable change from infinity until I get to about 4 ft.

(comments about the 'tastefulness' of the lights will be ignored. It was
my
wife's idea)

The tilt of the photo suggests the problem lies with the photographer's
getting into the eggnog a bit early.

"Christopher Pollard" wrote in message
...
It's Christmas, almost, and therefore my house is lit up like, erm, a
Christmas
tree. So I decided to take a photograph of it. Tried a few different
settings
but they all seemed out of focus.
At least I think it's a focus problem, it doesn't look like camera shake.
www.xmastree.34sp.com/images/pc140023.jpg
See what you think.

The camera was on a tripod, and I used the timer. It's a Olympus C-750,
and it
was in program mode, auto focus. It thought it had focussed correctly, the
green
indicator was steady.
That shot IIRC was f2.8 1/1.6. I was also using a wide angle adaptor, but
the
result was the same without it.

I tried the manual focus, but it's very difficult to use. The centre of
the
display shows an enlarged version of the centre of the image, but there's
no
noticeable change from infinity until I get to about 4 ft.

(comments about the 'tastefulness' of the lights will be ignored. It was
my
wife's idea)

The tilt of the photo suggests the problem lies with the photographer's
getting into the eggnog a bit early.

Marvin wrote:
The image has a very large range of intensity. Try to fill in the
background with a floodlight, then reduce the exposure.

When photoing "Christmas houses," I always use the flash on my digicam.
That makes the house visible - if dark - along with the lights after
appropriate PhotoShop work.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
BDissident news - plus immigration, gun rights, weather, Internet Gun Show
IA HREF="http://www.alamanceind.com"ALAMANCE INDEPENDENT:
official newspaper of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy/A/b/i

Marvin wrote:
The image has a very large range of intensity. Try to fill in the
background with a floodlight, then reduce the exposure.

When photoing "Christmas houses," I always use the flash on my digicam.
That makes the house visible - if dark - along with the lights after
appropriate PhotoShop work.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
BDissident news - plus immigration, gun rights, weather, Internet Gun Show
IA HREF="http://www.alamanceind.com"ALAMANCE INDEPENDENT:
official newspaper of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy/A/b/i

Christopher Pollard wrote:

It's Christmas, almost, and therefore my house is lit up like, erm, a Christmas
tree. So I decided to take a photograph of it. Tried a few different settings
but they all seemed out of focus.
At least I think it's a focus problem, it doesn't look like camera shake.
www.xmastree.34sp.com/images/pc140023.jpg
See what you think.

I think you're over exposed to begin with.
Set lens to three stops closed from widest aperture.
Spot meter one of the the white lights.
Increase exposure two stops from that reading (eg: slower shutter, not open up
the aperture). If you shoot RAW, three stops is probably possible.
Use of tripod/cable (or timer as you say below) is right on.
Manual Focus on a light directly in front.

Cheers,
Alan.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.