photographing a computer screen?

Kibo informs me that (Dave Martindale) stated that:

writes:

The above method's worked fine for me, every time I've tried it.

Using a camera with a leaf shutter, or a focal-plane shutter?

Focal-plane. I've only tried it with a few 35mm SLRs.

--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------

Kibo informs me that (Dave Martindale) stated that:

writes:

The above method's worked fine for me, every time I've tried it.

Using a camera with a leaf shutter, or a focal-plane shutter?

Focal-plane. I've only tried it with a few 35mm SLRs.

--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------

Kibo informs me that bugbear stated
that:

Al Dykes wrote:
In article ,
wrote:

Kibo informs me that Hugh Nagle stated
that:


Now, I know I could do a screen capture, but I was wondering if anyone had
any ideas on how best to photograph a computer screen.

It's easy. You'll need a tripod, positioned with the camera as parallel
as possible with the screen, & a shutter speed that's an *exact*
multiple of the displays refresh rate to prevent dark bars appearing in
the photo. Eg: to photograph an American TV screen (60Hz field rate,
30Hz refresh rate), you'd use a shutter speed of 1/30th, 1/15th, etc.

It's easier on the brain to just do a really long exposure;
a half-frame doesn't matter (much) if you're exposing 60 frames
anyway.

Tripod and a 1Sec exposure works every time, and I don't need
to know the refresh rate.

Yes, very true.
I was just making the assumption that the OP might be wanting the
TV/monitor in the background of a shot in which other things were
happening, rather than it just being the sole subject of the photo.

--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------

Kibo informs me that bugbear stated
that:

Al Dykes wrote:
In article ,
wrote:

Kibo informs me that Hugh Nagle stated
that:


Now, I know I could do a screen capture, but I was wondering if anyone had
any ideas on how best to photograph a computer screen.

It's easy. You'll need a tripod, positioned with the camera as parallel
as possible with the screen, & a shutter speed that's an *exact*
multiple of the displays refresh rate to prevent dark bars appearing in
the photo. Eg: to photograph an American TV screen (60Hz field rate,
30Hz refresh rate), you'd use a shutter speed of 1/30th, 1/15th, etc.

It's easier on the brain to just do a really long exposure;
a half-frame doesn't matter (much) if you're exposing 60 frames
anyway.

Tripod and a 1Sec exposure works every time, and I don't need
to know the refresh rate.

Yes, very true.
I was just making the assumption that the OP might be wanting the
TV/monitor in the background of a shot in which other things were
happening, rather than it just being the sole subject of the photo.

--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------

Dave Martindale wrote:
bugbear writes:


It's easier on the brain to just do a really long exposure;
a half-frame doesn't matter (much) if you're exposing 60 frames
anyway.


Yes, so 1/2 or 1 second exposure works really well.


Tripod and a 1Sec exposure works every time, and I don't need
to know the refresh rate.


The problem with 15 seconds

Stop, You need a better screen font in your newsreader. I said 1Sec.
As in "one second".

Even if you read the 'S' as a '5' it would say
15ec. What's an 'ec'?

BugBear

Dave Martindale wrote:
bugbear writes:


It's easier on the brain to just do a really long exposure;
a half-frame doesn't matter (much) if you're exposing 60 frames
anyway.


Yes, so 1/2 or 1 second exposure works really well.


Tripod and a 1Sec exposure works every time, and I don't need
to know the refresh rate.


The problem with 15 seconds

Stop, You need a better screen font in your newsreader. I said 1Sec.
As in "one second".

Even if you read the 'S' as a '5' it would say
15ec. What's an 'ec'?

BugBear

On 10/20/04 4:12 AM, in article ,
" wrote:



Yes, very true.
I was just making the assumption that the OP might be wanting the
TV/monitor in the background of a shot in which other things were
happening, rather than it just being the sole subject of the photo.

That's *exactly* what I had in mind when I posted originally. I wasn't
planning that the camera/tripod would be perfectly "squared up" to the
monitor. I intended that the monitor surround (i.e. non-screen parts) plus
some other "office environment" elements would be included in the
photograph.

So, the plot thickens...

Hugh

On 10/20/04 4:12 AM, in article ,
" wrote:



Yes, very true.
I was just making the assumption that the OP might be wanting the
TV/monitor in the background of a shot in which other things were
happening, rather than it just being the sole subject of the photo.

That's *exactly* what I had in mind when I posted originally. I wasn't
planning that the camera/tripod would be perfectly "squared up" to the
monitor. I intended that the monitor surround (i.e. non-screen parts) plus
some other "office environment" elements would be included in the
photograph.

So, the plot thickens...

Hugh

"Hugh Nagle" wrote in message
...
On 10/20/04 4:12 AM, in article
,
" wrote:



Yes, very true.
I was just making the assumption that the OP might be wanting the
TV/monitor in the background of a shot in which other things were
happening, rather than it just being the sole subject of the photo.

That's *exactly* what I had in mind when I posted originally. I
wasn't
planning that the camera/tripod would be perfectly "squared up" to
the
monitor. I intended that the monitor surround (i.e. non-screen
parts) plus
some other "office environment" elements would be included in the
photograph.


Even if you are photographing an LCD monitor you will find out
quickly, if not using an SLR, that the picture should be composed on
the camera LCD. I can handhold my Nikon 3200 (flash off!) and read
normal displayed text but, at the distances concerned, the eye-piece
is inadequate.


--
James V. Silverton
Potomac, Maryland, USA

"Hugh Nagle" wrote in message
...
On 10/20/04 4:12 AM, in article
,
" wrote:



Yes, very true.
I was just making the assumption that the OP might be wanting the
TV/monitor in the background of a shot in which other things were
happening, rather than it just being the sole subject of the photo.

That's *exactly* what I had in mind when I posted originally. I
wasn't
planning that the camera/tripod would be perfectly "squared up" to
the
monitor. I intended that the monitor surround (i.e. non-screen
parts) plus
some other "office environment" elements would be included in the
photograph.


Even if you are photographing an LCD monitor you will find out
quickly, if not using an SLR, that the picture should be composed on
the camera LCD. I can handhold my Nikon 3200 (flash off!) and read
normal displayed text but, at the distances concerned, the eye-piece
is inadequate.


--
James V. Silverton
Potomac, Maryland, USA