The Food Photography Topic

[ProfessionalHobbit]

You're much too kind, Diana.  Lots of great advice on this thread.  I think there is possibly an older thread, but it's been a while.  I'll have to go look.

 

A simplification:  most good food photography consists of great light, good aesthetic sense and attention to detail (i.e., Simon_liver's point about "dirty plates" upthread).  Equipment may play a role in enhancing a photo; that being said, a crappy photo will be apparent regardless of whether you used a camera that cost thousands of dollars or a cheap cell phone.  Don't worry about the tool you're using.  It took me a while to have that epiphany.

 

PS.  If you look back on the blog far enough, you can see how my photography evolved over time.  It was pretty crappy when I first started.

[Kerala]

Just testing, please ignore me. Hope this is an acceptable place to experiment. If not, please redirect me.

SD card

Dropbox: download then upload

 

 

Editing: cut and paste in download

 

Well that didn't work...

Edited February 11, 2017 by Kerala (log)

[rotuts]

@Kerala  

 

I think your Chicken needed to rotate 1`80 :

 

 

I used to drink that same Chabils , and use snow , when available as you have

 

TJ's ?  it used to be quite good many years ago @ 8.99   then it went up 2 bucks  ( here in MA ) and had

 

no chablis flavor at all !

[Kerala]

2 hours ago, rotuts said:

@Kerala

 

I think your Chicken needed to rotate 1`80 :

 

 

 

Thanks rotuts, that is what I was trying to do! Hate showing up my grossly inadequate abilities...

As for the Chablis, it's just a random old pic to see what happens when I try and post. Not Trader Joe's- I'm in the UK. Quick bit of googling reveals it's Maurice et Fils. I probably got it from Morrison's, currently at £12 a pop. Must have been on sale!

 

[JoNorvelleWalker]

A timely bump to an important topic.  As much as I have doubts about subscription software, this afternoon I upgraded my Photoshop from version 7 to what they call Creative Cloud.  Things are new and familiar all at the same time.

 

As I was uploading my dinner pictures I noticed the file sizes are now much larger.  Undoubtedly a setting somewhere.  Any thoughts what I am doing wrong?

 

I do very much like the feature that I can now synch my iPad pictures without ever connecting the iPad to the computer(s).  This alone is a great improvement.

[Toliver]

15 hours ago, JoNorvelleWalker said:

As I was uploading my dinner pictures I noticed the file sizes are now much larger.  Undoubtedly a setting somewhere.  Any thoughts what I am doing wrong?

It all depends on what you intend to do with the final image.

What file format are you using to save your pictures? If your images are for posting on the internet or sending in an email, then JPEG's will do. It's a compressed image file format that allows you to decrease the file size. Especially if you use the option "File>Save for Web". With that option, you can adjust the picture quality and see the file size change as you change the "Quality" setting. Make sure you are viewing the "Optimized" tab...the file size should be shown in the lower right corner of the user interface window. When you change the quality, the file size number will also change.

If you intend on printing out your images, then TIFF would be the better file format, even though the file size will be quite a bit larger when compared to JPEG's. TIFF is a printing format.

Note that TIFF's can now be saved with layers, which increases the final file size. If you don't need the layers, then make sure you don't check the "Layers" box at the bottom of the user interface/save window.

 

[JoNorvelleWalker]

I use .png for posting on the web, but I believe I've figured out the difference.  If I open the original image file as an object in Photoshop I get large files.  If instead I choose edit in Photoshop I get normal sized files.

 

[JoNorvelleWalker]

Can anyone aid me?  I have a shiny new iPad that captures .dng files.  I can sync .dng files from the iPad through Lightroom on my PC.  But I have not figured out how to save .dng on my PC.  If I export a .dng file from Lightroom I can get either a full resolution .jpg file or a reduced resolution .dng file.  Either of which drives me to drink.

 

It does not take much to drive me to drink.

 

And of course I have been searching for a solution on the web and in my numerous* Photoshop books.  I have been using Photoshop since version 3.  I have written Photoshop plugins.  But I am stumped.

 

 

*Probably about a dozen.

 

[JoNorvelleWalker]

To resolve my .dng file question, a kind member solved my problem by PM.  Unsure why not publicly as others here might need the information someday.

 

Anyhow with the imminent release of Modernist Bread, there is now a solution to another problem:

http://www.picture-plugins.com/

 

While perhaps not the intended application I can affirm this SilverFast plugin works great for removing baguette crumbs from the tablecloth.  Discount till the end of the month.  Disclaimer, I am in no way affiliated except as a customer.

 

[Martin Fisher]

I have a condition, essential tremor—that Katharine Hepburn thing—which makes it impossible for me to take a photo freehand. 

It's such a pain to setup a tripod EVERY time I want to snap a photo, so I'm hoping that Anti-Blur Cam and a stabilizing gimbal will remedy the issue.

We'll see! 

 

 

 

Edited November 28, 2017 by DiggingDogFarm (log)

[dcarch]

7 hours ago, DiggingDogFarm said:

I have a condition, essential tremor—that Katharine Hepburn thing—which makes it impossible for me to take a photo freehand. 

It's such a pain to setup a tripod EVERY time I want to snap a photo, so I'm hoping that Anti-Blur Cam and a stabilizing gimbal will remedy the issue.

We'll see! 

 

 

Or remote bounce (reflective) slave flashes. 

 

dcarch

 

[ProfessionalHobbit]

Just a selection of pix shot throughout 2017. I stopped blogging a while ago and have since transitioned to social media but I keep the old site around as storage space for old photos and also for inspiration.

 

B and I went to NYC in late April and it was there that my camera zonked and died. Since my camera is my baby - even more important than my cell phone, I dragged my hubby over to Best Buy to pick up a new device - a SONY that I was initially skeptical but have since gotten used to. The below are pix from our kitchen, along with shots from farmers' markets and stores in New York and San Francisco, and food from excursions to local restaurants. Enjoy.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[JoNorvelleWalker]

It must all be due to the quality of the camera.

 

[ProfessionalHobbit]

52 minutes ago, JoNorvelleWalker said:

It must all be due to the quality of the camera.

 

 

Partly.

 

A lot of it has to do with the quality of lighting. Most of the above were shot in natural light or surroundings that were well-lit (i.e., the wild boar bacon in the last pic), where I didn't have to do as much post-processing. I'm not a food blogger who likes using artificial lighting (e.g., lamps that simulate daylight). I feel that's way too much effort for a snap, but then again, my livelihood isn't dependent on digital pixels.

[blue_dolphin]

Thank you for sharing your lovely photos, @ProfessionalHobbit - I'm now very hungry!  Which SONY camera did you settle on? 

[ProfessionalHobbit]

I don't remember the model number. I'll have to look for the instruction manual when I get home.

[JoNorvelleWalker]

4 hours ago, ProfessionalHobbit said:

Partly.

 

Went through to the keeper

 

[ProfessionalHobbit]

5 minutes ago, JoNorvelleWalker said:

 

Went through to the keeper

 

 

I'm not sure I understand...

 

You can easily shoot great pictures with low-budget tools as well as high-end tools. The device I currently have costs about $325. None of the cameras I've owned have been over $350.

 

Having a great eye and access to quality lighting is more important IMHO than a pricey camera.

[JoNorvelleWalker]

3 minutes ago, ProfessionalHobbit said:

 

I'm not sure I understand...

 

You can easily shoot great pictures with low-budget tools as well as high-end tools. The device I currently have costs about $325. None of the cameras I've owned have been over $350.

 

Having a great eye and access to quality lighting is more important IMHO than a pricey camera.

 

It was a compliment.  Beautiful pictures.  So much for dry humor.

 

[dcarch]

I have often said, "Great cooks are bad photographers, and great photographers are bad cooks."

I will, however, make an exception in your case.

 

dcarch

[Smokeydoke]

It's time to start getting serious about my photos. Help me.

 

    

 

 

Yeah, yeah, I know, dirty fork. But outside of the crumbs, I have no idea how to bring this photo to life.

 

 

 

 

[blue_dolphin]

You have 2 focal points here, the slice of cake on the plate and the cut cake on the stand.   Decide which one you want to be the star.    Right now, they're sort of equal in the photos

Looks like you have some nice natural light coming in from the left side of the photo.  I would rearrange things so the cut surfaces of the cake are facing the window, or at least better illuminated so you can see the nice layers of cake and frosting.

You can put the plate with the slice of cake in front of your cake stand and focus on that, with the cake in the background or focus on the cake itself with the plate, slice and fork a little to the side.

2 cents from a non-pro 

[liuzhou]

I agree with @blue_dolphin. The cut surface of the cake is in shadow, so can't be seen clearly. Turn the whole lot round and use the natural light to bring out the detail in the cake.

[gfweb]

I'd add that a program that lets you crop and adjust contrast will add warmth and interest. 

 

A low camera angle is helpful. 90 degrees ...terrible. 30 to 45 degrees is nice. 

[Smokeydoke]

Thank you, all! I'll try all of these tomorrow in the natural light.