Статьи о загранице, путешествиях и отдыхе

Опросы показали, что статьи на тему seo оптимизация сайта сходят на нет.

7 Сентябрь 2010

Mitigation of light from the built – in flare

написано в рубрике: Software — Метки: — admin @ 11:28
Many ways are known to soften rather rigid light from external flare. The most popular devices serving for this purpose, are various насадки, мини софт-боксы, additional reflectors etc. rather popular and effective way is разворот of the light-emitting head of external flare upwards (flare in a low white ceiling).
Mitigation of light from the built – in flare — more complex(difficult) task. First, in any case the area of a light-emitting element остаётся is rather small, and, hence, speech can go only about some mitigation of shadows. Secondly, any светорассеивающая насадка on the built – in flare reduces е ё conducting number and consequently to remove with additional disseminating насадкой it is possible only rather close objects. Thirdly, the built – in flare rigidly fastens on the chamber and is always directly revolved in the party of object of shooting.
In a fig. 1 the result of shooting with the built – in flare of a rose removed from a background approximately on 15 see is shown. As well as it was necessary to expect, in this case on a background there is a precise sated shadow.
Fig. 1. The precise sated shadow
On a background — result of use of the built – in flare without насадок.
Fig. 2 Unsuccessful applications external насадки as a white plastic cover with thickness of walls of 2 mm.
The Fig. 2 demonstrates, what not everyone насадка approaches for a mitigation of shadows. In this case flare was placed inside of a plastic cover with dimensions 80 х 50 х 25 mm. Plastic of dairy colour thickness of 2 mm has appeared unsufficiently светопроницаемым, and as a result the built – in flare has generated the greatest possible light pulse, having reduced disseminating properties насадки on no.
Elementary насадки
As elementary popular насадки on the built – in flare many photographers use a white matte box from under a film. Thus often on a box do(make) a figured cut facilitating fastening насадки to a camera.
For realization of experiments, described in this clause, the box was simply cut half-and-half (see fig. 3). Such decision allows if necessary to insert one половинку into another and to use for shooting насадку of the double thickness.
Fig. 3. The cut half-and-half box from under a film
Other by elementary “«насадкой” is a usual sheet писчей of a paper. In frameworks « of unscientific experiments », described in the given clause, the paper of density 80 г/м2 was used. At job with a paper to receive насадку of the double thickness easier simple: it is enough to combine a sheet half-and-half.
What from these two elementary насадок is more effective?
Results of experiment
In a fig. 4 and 5 the results of application by elementary насадки as a box from a film are shown.
Fig. 4. Unary насадка
From thin plastic
Fig. 5 Double насадка
From thin plastic
As it is visible, in this case application has allowed elementary thin plastic насадки only a little to wash away a shadow on a background. The intensity of a shadow though has decreased, but it is extremely unsignificant. Also it is necessary to note, that in this case насадка of the double thickness practically does not increase размытость, density of a shadow.
Fig. 6. Насадка as
Sheet of a paper А4
Fig. 7 Насадка as a sheet
Papers А4, combined twice
With the help usual писчей of a paper (the fig. 6 and 7) is possible to reach(achieve) the much greater mitigation of shadows.
The received results should not be treated in the sense that it is necessary to refuse use any plastic насадок. When the shadows should be softened only slightly, they are irreplaceable. However for a radical mitigation of shadows it is better to use others насадки, from which itself elementary is the usual sheet of a white paper.
Conclusions
In frameworks « of small unscientific experiments » to do(make) any categorical conclusions is inappropriate. Especially it is fair concerning the built – in flares. Final result will depend appreciably and on a design of flare, and from е ё of conducting number, and from managing electronics of the chamber. For a choice of an optimum disseminating element the readers should lead(carry out) the small own experiments similar described above.
Details for почитателей скрупулёзности
In the described experiments as test object for shooting was chosen цветок of family Rosaceae. He was established before a background on distance approximately 15 see. For shooting the chamber Pentax MZ-6 with the built – in flare was used. On the chamber was established объектив Pentax SMC 28-70/4. The shooting was made on a focal length of 70 mm.

Many ways are known to soften rather rigid light from external flare. The most popular devices serving for this purpose, are various насадки, мини софт-боксы, additional reflectors etc. rather popular and effective way is разворот of the light-emitting head of external flare upwards (flare in a low white ceiling).
Mitigation of light from the built – in flare — more complex(difficult) task. First, in any case the area of a light-emitting element остаётся is rather small, and, hence, speech can go only about some mitigation of shadows. Secondly, any светорассеивающая насадка on the built – in flare reduces е ё conducting number and consequently to remove with additional disseminating насадкой it is possible only rather close objects. Thirdly, the built – in flare rigidly fastens on the chamber and is always directly revolved in the party of object of shooting.
In a fig. 1 the result of shooting with the built – in flare of a rose removed from a background approximately on 15 see is shown. As well as it was necessary to expect, in this case on a background there is a precise sated shadow.

Fig. 1. The precise sated shadowOn a background — result of use of the built – in flare without насадок.
Fig. 2 Unsuccessful applications external насадки as a white plastic cover with thickness of walls of 2 mm.   The Fig. 2 demonstrates, what not everyone насадка approaches for a mitigation of shadows. In this case flare was placed inside of a plastic cover with dimensions 80 х 50 х 25 mm. Plastic of dairy colour thickness of 2 mm has appeared unsufficiently светопроницаемым, and as a result the built – in flare has generated the greatest possible light pulse, having reduced disseminating properties насадки on no.

Elementary насадки

As elementary popular насадки on the built – in flare many photographers use a white matte box from under a film. Thus often on a box do(make) a figured cut facilitating fastening насадки to a camera.For realization of experiments, described in this clause, the box was simply cut half-and-half (see fig. 3). Such decision allows if necessary to insert one половинку into another and to use for shooting насадку of the double thickness.
Fig. 3. The cut half-and-half box from under a film
Other by elementary “«насадкой” is a usual sheet писчей of a paper. In frameworks « of unscientific experiments », described in the given clause, the paper of density 80 г/м2 was used. At job with a paper to receive насадку of the double thickness easier simple: it is enough to combine a sheet half-and-half.
What from these two elementary насадок is more effective?

Results of experiment
In a fig. 4 and 5 the results of application by elementary насадки as a box from a film are shown.

Fig. 4. Unary насадкаFrom thin plastic
Fig. 5 Double насадкаFrom thin plastic
As it is visible, in this case application has allowed elementary thin plastic насадки only a little to wash away a shadow on a background. The intensity of a shadow though has decreased, but it is extremely unsignificant. Also it is necessary to note, that in this case насадка of the double thickness practically does not increase размытость, density of a shadow.

Fig. 6. Насадка as Sheet of a paper А4
Fig. 7 Насадка as a sheetPapers А4, combined twice
With the help usual писчей of a paper (the fig. 6 and 7) is possible to reach(achieve) the much greater mitigation of shadows.
The received results should not be treated in the sense that it is necessary to refuse use any plastic насадок. When the shadows should be softened only slightly, they are irreplaceable. However for a radical mitigation of shadows it is better to use others насадки, from which itself elementary is the usual sheet of a white paper.

Conclusions
In frameworks « of small unscientific experiments » to do(make) any categorical conclusions is inappropriate. Especially it is fair concerning the built – in flares. Final result will depend appreciably and on a design of flare, and from е ё of conducting number, and from managing electronics of the chamber. For a choice of an optimum disseminating element the readers should lead(carry out) the small own experiments similar described above.
Details for почитателей скрупулёзности
In the described experiments as test object for shooting was chosen цветок of family Rosaceae. He was established before a background on distance approximately 15 see. For shooting the chamber Pentax MZ-6 with the built – in flare was used. On the chamber was established объектив Pentax SMC 28-70/4. The shooting was made on a focal length of 70 mm.

Нет комментариев

Еще нет комментариев.

RSS лента комментариев к этой записи.

Извините, комментирование на данный момент закрыто.

Работает на WordPress