# Sometimes It'S Better In The Dark



## PaulBoy

As I don't have a DSLR I wasn't sure if my Canon G7 was up to the job of taking a decent lume shot - Both my recent watch purchases (especially the Oris) have excellent lume - Not fantastic results but I hope you get the general idea? ... Paul :thumbsup:

Longines Hydroconquest










Oris TT1 Diver


----------



## BlueKnight

That's a great shot Paul. Compared to me you're a PRO!


----------



## sonyman

Paul get yourslef one of those little torches off the bay the little UV/LED/LASER ones about Â£5 they are great for charging up that lume and you get a free laser pointer to annoy the pets with. :thumbsup:

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/New-15-LED-UV-LASER-Ultraviolet-Flashlight-Light-Torch_W0QQitemZ260533874279QQcmdZViewItemQQptZUK_SportsLeisure_Camping_LightsLanternsTorches?hash=item3ca9076e67


----------



## sheepsteeth

how do you take the pic to show the second hand in a time lapse king of fashion?


----------



## vamos666

sheepsteeth said:


> how do you take the pic to show the second hand in a time lapse king of fashion?


Long exposure, 3-5 seconds or so...


----------



## Parabola

They look good


----------



## minkle

Great Paul, both look really good, great watches. I like lumes shots when you can still see all the other details..


----------



## sheepsteeth

cheers vamos, im off to learn how to adjust the exposure and try it myself.


----------



## PaulBoy

vamos666 said:


> sheepsteeth said:
> 
> 
> 
> how do you take the pic to show the second hand in a time lapse king of fashion?
> 
> 
> 
> Long exposure, 3-5 seconds or so...
Click to expand...

These ARE long exposure shots (either 2 or 6 secs iirc) - I think to see the second hand the watch needs to be quartz but I could be talking sh!te ... Paul :thumbsup:


----------



## Pilot65

:kewlpics: :notworthy: :notworthy: :notworthy: :notworthy: :notworthy:


----------



## jl9139

great shots


----------



## roryfirth

Nice, i've been really impressed by some of the lume pics i've seen, will have to get my DSLR out and have a go!


----------



## The Canon Man

I've been inspired to have a go at that myself.










I haven't got a DSLR either.

This was done on a Canon digital IXUS compact with a 1 watt LED lamp providing the ambient light.


----------



## owain

Here's a couple I took earlier. Not sure what camera it was, some panasonic that was lying around at my parents house! Came out quite well I think - better than some of my previous efforts.


----------



## K300

think I'll give it a go this weekend


----------



## Billy Hoyle

That Longines Hydroconquest shot is pretty stunning paul! B)


----------



## malus65

Great pictures indeed and a terrific watch!


----------



## PaulBoy

Thought I'd add to my old thread rather than clog things up with a new one (?) - My two latest watches have stunning lume - The Fortis can literally be used as a torch & I love the fact that the seconds dial on the Oris has it's own lume - Enjoy!

Paul :thumbsup:


----------



## The Canon Man

Ooooooo..... that looks great.

Always had a soft spot for Oris.


----------



## Chromejob

Often my watch just doesn't work well in dim light. It overcompensates ... it adjusts to a monstrously low white level ... but in the last 24 hours, my Fujifilm E900 (9MP, with RAW capability, though neither of these were taken in RAW) has come through quite nicely. Brought a smile to my face even.

Minimal editing in Photoshop other than adjusting the white level down to the proper threshold, and maybe boosting saturation 10%.

Hope you like.

*Last night (under the table)...*










*This morning (bedside table)...*










... Let's see your best night moves.


----------



## Adz

A good tip is a black light , you can get small keyring ones which show the lume up well


----------



## dombox40

Neither am I, just taken this picture well you were posting this, snap you might say. Thanks for the watch.


----------



## Chromejob

Adz said:


> A good tip is a black light , you can get small keyring ones which show the lume up well


 Black light? Cheating. 

I've found nothing better than shining my Honda Euro Accord's HID (Xenon) headlight onto a watch for about 2-4 seconds. I have to find a big enough black light to illuminate the dial and bezel ... little "dog pee discoverer" ones are too focused.

Oh, I have a small, powerful LED flashlight (charges in the lighter socket of the car) does a bang up job, too.


----------



## PaulBoy

Two of my favs below - I love that the Oris Small Second second dial has its own lume - The Fortis is just in a class of its own though ... Paul :thumbsup:


----------



## Chromejob

Nice....! (BTW, guys, I was being tongue in cheek for my previous comments. All nice watches.) But the thread idea is *natural (or near-natural) shots of watches in the night, in the dark*. Use of black lights or Photoshop to darken the overall image, or make the lume stand out, are gently suggested to be *out of bounds*. (We have daytime and black light-augmented pics in the forums already.)

I forgot about these pics I took when I got my M5 ... taken in a darkened room at dusk, with lume charged 5 mins prior in another room.



















Yikes, the lume on those Omega hands really glow right (and long).



David Spalding said:


> Often my watch just doesn't work well in dim light. It overcompensates ... it adjusts to a monstrously low white level ...


Yikes, I meant Often my *camera* just doesn't work well in dim light....


----------



## sam.

Nice shots David!









This was taken while out caving...........in my under stairs cupboard amongst the Spiders!


----------



## Chromejob

I like the numerals on that Reactor!

I find that "macro mode" is a must but sometimes it depends upon the watch, not the camera...



















This Seiko burns bright all night long ... what in the gods' names did Seiko use on this? (I may have to point out that no black lights were used in taking these.)


----------



## AlexC1981

Can you guess this one?










This one has been recently re-lumed by Silver Hawk


----------



## Chromejob

If you're happy and you know it, clap your hands...! Nice one.


----------



## Chromejob

I forgot to post this recent shot of my new Orient...


----------



## langtoftlad

Adz said:


> A good tip is a black light , you can get small keyring ones  which show the lume up well


Cheating or not - I've always quite liked my attempt with my #17


----------



## chocko

Thought i would have a go at a lume shot(only slight touch up on black parts) took 10 shots this was my favourite


----------



## AbingtonLad

Nice! That be the 'Orca' I guess B)


----------



## Kutusov

Well, you had the same problem I have with lume shots... For the life of me I don't know how to set the camera for less than 30'' exposure 

Cool Orca though, that Citizen blue lume is amazing!


----------



## chocko

AbingtonLad said:


> Nice! That be the 'Orca' I guess B)












Yes it is a Citizen Orca


----------



## ollyhock




----------



## 86latour

Can someone explain to a photography retard how one captures a lume shot?

Seriously, It needs to be idiot friendly...


----------



## HappyLad

86latour said:


> Can someone explain to a photography retard how one captures a lume shot?
> 
> Seriously, It needs to be idiot friendly...


First thing to do - charge up the lume.

I've an LED torch that seems to really blast the lume on my watches, literally half a second and the lume will be glowing bright.

You need to think about where your taking the photo. If ambient light is too bright then the lume will not stand out. If there is no ambient light, then all you will get is a picture of the lume, and black where the watch is. I find a dimly lit room is best, but experiment to find what you like best.

Camera set up - all depends on the camera and lens you are using....

But one thing for sure - Use a TRIPOD and trigger the shutter release either with a remote or with a timed delay to make sure there is no camera shake.

Aperture - You need an aperture wide enough to collect as much light as possible, but not too wide that you have no depth of field.

ISO setting - think about dialing ISO down to avoid grain. High ISO sensitivity is great for low light but can sometimes make your pics look grainy even on high end SLR's.

Shutter speed - make it long. But remember that if the second hand is turning, then you will get motion blur.

Pic below was taken using a Canon DSLR and a kit lens. Settings were:

focal length - 55mm (86mm for 35mm frame)

aperture - f5.6

shutter - 4seconds

ISO - 200










Phot bel


----------



## 86latour

yeah I really can't be arsed to buy a tripod, I played around with some shots just with timer and got pretty good results, no camera shake but limited for angles!


----------



## Chromejob

86latour said:


> Can someone explain to a photography retard how one captures a lume shot?
> 
> Seriously, It needs to be idiot friendly...


You really need a tripod, no excuses. I find one of these (available on the cheap and rock-solid reliable) works most every time:

I use LED, lamp, or even the flash to charge up lume. But not too much. Pic's better if the lume has settled a bit. Leave a little light somewhere across the room, helps light the watch. I keep forgetting to use my cameras RAW mode (no compression); will have to try manually setting the ISO, I usually use the AUTO or NIGHT modes on mine. I have gotten some good pics....




























cont'd...


----------



## Chromejob

cont'd





































cont'd....


----------



## Chromejob

cont'd




























I started a thread of our favorite lume shots called "It's better at night," I wish'd more posts would appear there. :crybaby:


----------



## BlueKnight

ollyhock said:


> You know i really like this watch, just cant get my head round that huge "ROTOR SELF WINDING" wording its so vulgar, otherwise a great tudor watch


I fully agree with you. Too many watches look like billboards.


----------



## BondandBigM

Here's my attempt with my new camera, no idea about the settings though just a lucky shot after some fiddling around with it.


----------



## BlueKnight

BondandBigM said:


> Here's my attempt with my new camera, no idea about the settings though just a lucky shot after some fiddling around with it.


You should be able to retrieve your settings from the photo properties on your Photobucket hosting site.


----------



## BondandBigM

BlueKnight said:


> BondandBigM said:
> 
> 
> 
> Here's my attempt with my new camera, no idea about the settings though just a lucky shot after some fiddling around with it.
> 
> 
> 
> You should be able to retrieve your settings from the photo properties on your Photobucket hosting site.
Click to expand...

Ok first daft question :lol: :lol:

How will photobucket know what the camera set up was ?????


----------



## Kutusov

BondandBigM said:


> How will photobucket know what the camera set up was ?????


They'll ask this lady: 










The settings are saved in the file along the picture so a photography software can check them out. That's how BlueKnight knows the settings from a particular picture.


----------



## HappyLad

Its called EXIF data.

meta data that describes the camera and setup when the image was taken


----------



## Kutusov

Ok, so finally I figured how to sort the shutter speed... it was so obvious was I doing wrong that I :wallbash:

So couple of tries...


----------



## Chromejob

Great photos, Kutusov, before and after :read: RTFM. Likewise, BK, I like that strobing sweep second hand.

EXIF data is displayed by some of the photo sites, I know Flickr does. I deal with it all the time in Photoshop Bridge. Here's an example. Following that, the kind of data that Photoshop keeps when adjusting Camera RAW data (uncompressed, camera native format files).



















This is from experimenting I was doing this week with manual aperture settings (the watch in fg and sunglasses and coin in the bg, aligned auto-focus), and exposure settings for lume (manual ISO, shutter speed, white balance). Fun stuff, oh boy does digital make it easier to play and learn from.


----------



## sheepsteeth

heres a quick try i had with my eco-zilla:










how do i reduce the grainy look of the image? is it a limitation of the camera (finepix s2500hd bidge type camera)or is there something which typically can be adjusted to change the look of this?


----------



## Kutusov

sheepsteeth said:


> how do i reduce the grainy look of the image? is it a limitation of the camera (finepix s2500hd bidge type camera)or is there something which typically can be adjusted to change the look of this?


That's called "noise" and you got more noise in a direct proportion with ISOs... So if you can set the ISO settings, bring it down a notch, maybe 400.

BTW, ISO is kind of the sensitivity to light. In the old times you bought film with different ISO ratings. 100 was the regular one and more than that would be for low light photos. It's the same way with DSLRs and that means that if you tune down the ISO settings you'll need more light --> longer exposure --> lower shutter speed.


----------



## Kutusov

Fresh ones... Aristo and Junkers:


----------



## Chromejob

sheepsteeth said:


> how do i reduce the grainy look of the image? is it a limitation of the camera (finepix s2500hd bidge type camera)or is there something which typically can be adjusted to change the look of this?


Consult your manual on, as mentioned, setting ISO manually to a lower number. Graininess was often an artifact of higher speed films, e.g. ISO 1000 (for quick action pics).

You may also pick up artifacts from JPEG compression on your camera. Set your camera for the highest quality possible (bigger image). If your camera supports RAW, then color artifacts all but disappear, as RAW images are uncompressed. See my pics above of Adobe Bridge, you may note the files are 9MB or 18MB ... RAW baby RAW. :naughty:


----------



## Kutusov

David Spalding said:


> You may also pick up artifacts from JPEG compression on your camera. Set your camera for the highest quality possible (bigger image). If your camera supports RAW, then color artifacts all but disappear, as RAW images are uncompressed. See my pics above of Adobe Bridge, you may note the files are 9MB or 18MB ... RAW baby RAW. :naughty:


You seem to be learning a thing or two and that means danger zone!! Won't take long before we see your new Nikon D3x (US$7500 for the body alone)


----------



## Chromejob

Nope. For that kinda cash, I'll drop my car on new springs, shocks, brake system, and maybe even put some stabilization stuff under the bonnet.

I liked that Fuji made a pro-am model with several manual modes (even has a button that shows the white level histogram while you're aiming), and was one of the only < $700 (that's the right # of zeroes) cameras with Camera RAW. I'm tellin ya, for point 'n shoots, Fujis are da bomb.

Back on topic, did I share these recent shots?



















The last was taken with Camera RAW and manual settings. You probably can't tell the diff', it's just easier to work with.


----------



## Kutusov

David Spalding said:


> Back on topic, did I share these recent shots?


No, you didn't! Looking great!


----------



## Sparky

Here's one I took yesterday:

Damasko DA36










Mark


----------



## 86latour

First..


----------



## 86latour

and..


----------



## 86latour

And this beauty,


----------



## Adz

Ive been playing about recently as well over the hol`s with mixed results......










first attempt with varying light source/positions, need more time to play around ,just dont have any now since going back to work.

...Typo


----------



## Kutusov

Adz said:


> Ive been playing about recently as well over the hol`s with mixed results......
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> first attempt with varying light source/positions, need more time to play around ,just dont have any now since going back to work.
> 
> ...Typo


I had one of those, probably the watch with best lume I have ever had!

Edit... Dho!! That's the one I sold to you, isn't it? :bag:


----------



## Adz

"well kutusov, there have been many that have come and gone but , today , all the way from scotland to see you today THIS is that watch" (in a this is your life presentation kind of way







)


----------



## Kutusov

Adz said:


> "well kutusov, there have been many that have come and gone but , today , all the way from scotland to see you today THIS is that watch" (in a this is your life presentation kind of way
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> )


 :notworthy: :notworthy:

Amazing lume on that thing! :thumbup:


----------



## 86latour

Is that a watch or a torch????


----------



## Chromejob

A little fun and practice last night with the Fujicam, of one of my newest acquisitions. As always, no black light was used at any time.

[IMG alt="20110107-3770_oceanblack_...70_oceanblack_flightoffour_lume_600.jpg[/IMG]

Yes, the pic is clickable. Go ahead, you know you want to.










The problem, as you can see here, is that at extreme low light levels, with an incandescent lamp elsewhere in the room somewhere, the entire color cast is way too red. Correcting it ends up shifting the lume color from greenish to inaccurate bluish. But I didn't think anyone would mind, so to speak.... So I have to play around with corrections to only one color channel (even more work ).


----------



## Chromejob

[IMG alt="20110107-3770a_oceanblack...0a_oceanblack_flightoffour_lume_600.jpg[/IMG]

Yes, the pic is clickable. Go ahead, you know you want to.

I don't know if these are any better.... Photoshop color correction and tweaking is hard.



Kutusov said:


> 2 things....
> 
> 1) You took the metal PVDed bracelet out of that watch??? WHHHHYYYYYY?????!!!! :shocking:
> 
> 2) I think the problem with colours and background light has to do with your White Balance settings... Here's an example on how that makes a huge difference (Same everything except WB settings)....


Because I can always wear a metal bracelet later. Also ... my wrist seems to swell and shrink more in cold weather, making wearing metal bracelets problematic. Fits fine inside, then starts slipping around outside. Size it for outside, and it's too snug inside. I don't seem to have this problem with leather. Besides, I bought this sharkskin band, my first for a few years, just for this watch.

Yes, there's lots of color controls in Photoshop, particularly with a Camera RAW original (which all of these were). Color temp, exposure, curves, and the almighty Levels. The correct copy I have above was done with some more detailed tweaking of the color levels and some curves adjustments. Unfortunately, this effects other areas, even using curves ... note that your second pic has a overall bluish cast (James Cameron would get a hard-on), losing the colors of the band. Granted, the band is not the subject. :think: I like your first pic, btw, the crystal picked up a blue wash in the second one as well.


----------



## Chromejob

David Spalding said:


> ... The correct copy I have above was done with some more detailed tweaking of the color levels and some curves adjustments. ....


WRONG. My first versions at least have the background elements (photograph, wall) in the correct color. :duh: I should give up while I still have half a brain....


----------



## Kutusov

Yeap, I liked the first one better too. It shows better the lume colours.

Now I remembered that you go with RAW pictures... never tried that so I don't know but the white balance thingy I was talking about is not a PS correction of make over, it's a camera setting (you probably know that already so if you do don't mind me  )

I think the first picture was taken with a WB setting to "Shade" and the second to "Tungsten light bulbs" and that's why it compensates with bluish-ish colours as those light-bulbs give a red-yellowish feel to slow shutter speed photos...

BTW, I'll mail the second one to Mr. Cameron, maybe he would like to contract me! Life on Hollywood should be fun :naughty:

BTW2: I also have that problem with bracelets... too loose in the morning, too tight in the afternoon, especially during hot weather.


----------



## Chromejob

Yes, the camera records all that, whether I set it or not. OF course, for some shots I'm using a night mode, or manual settings,....










The fun part is I can apply all those after the fact. In RAW, I can make the changes non-destructively (i.e. I just reset back to the original image settings to show them to you). And in RAW I can make some pre-programmed changes based on the same biases ... or make adjustments manually via temperature, hue, exposure, etc. I also have saved change presets, generally for daylight shots (nighttime lume shots are to unpredictable).










That's before I even start tweaking channels individually in Photoshop, which I tried earlier. This is the beauty (and devilry) of PS ... you can do things three different ways, and each way is a bit better for a particular sort of work. Arrrrrgh.

Looking at this, I just realized that I should be making a (non-destructive) adjustment layer that masks out the watch, to adjust the background, then ANOTHER adjustment layer that reverses the mask and does it only to the watch. Oh boy ... here i go again...


----------



## Chromejob

[IMG alt="20110107-3770b_oceanblack...0b_oceanblack_flightoffour_lume_600.jpg[/IMG]

Yes, the pic is clickable. Go ahead, you know you want to.

I'm so tired, I don't know if I've made any improvement on the last edits ... the blue sky in the photograph should be clear, the frame should be a cherry red-brown, and the watch glowing greenish with no red shading on the crystal or bezel....


----------



## Draygo

Here you go, David...










You'd think that capturing a lume shot on a full lume dial that shines like a torch would be easy, wouldn't you? I've discovered it's not


----------



## Chromejob

Ah, I'm feeling the bluish background there mate. Well done.


----------



## Murphy Slaw

You guys are REALLY GOOD with those cameras. I spend most of my here just looking at pictures.

:clapping:


----------



## Scouse

Lume shots should show up well with a UV light source too. One of those banknote checkers or a UV torch make lume show up really well and shouldn't affect the camera shot too much.


----------



## Chromejob

That's cheating.







:sly:


----------



## Kutusov

David Spalding said:


> That's cheating.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> :sly:


 :clapping: :thumbsup:


----------



## Chromejob

Kutusov said:


> Yeap, I liked the first one better too. It shows better the lume colours. ....


But the first pic, I adjusted so clumsily, that the lume appeared blue like a Seiko. It's not, Gunter uses a green lume on the Ocean Ones.

I don't think I posted this here, not really a "lume porn" shot, but got the lume charged up for these nighttime shots inside my car (or the Orient x STI 2010 watch):


----------



## BondandBigM

So been having a fiddle around again with this camera I bought, my close up ones as you saw were rubbish and so far this is about the best I managed to get.


----------



## Kutusov

BondandBigM said:


> So been having a fiddle around again with this camera I bought, my close up ones as you saw were rubbish and so far this is about the best I managed to get.


Nice socialist cats there!!   (left fist/pawn raised)

...and didn't knew you had a GMT!


----------



## BondandBigM

Kutusov said:


> Nice socialist cats there!!   (left fist/pawn raised)


I liked China, it's one of the few places I would like to go back to and see more of. Although I looked a bit out of place in Tiananmen Square, Rolex, Armani and I was about a foot and half taller than 99% of the locals :lol: :lol: I was there on the eve of their yearly rocket parade and I never saw so many people in one place before or since unfortunately we moved on the next day and didn't get to see it. I might still have my little red book somewhere


----------



## Kutusov

BondandBigM said:


> I liked China, it's one of the few places I would like to go back to and see more of. Although I looked a bit out of place in Tiananmen Square, Rolex, Armani and I was about a foot and half taller than 99% of the locals :lol: :lol: I was there on the eve of their yearly rocket parade and I never saw so many people in one place before or since unfortunately we moved on the next day and didn't get to see it. I might still have my little red book somewhere


Not out of place with Rolex and Armani... They have lot's of those Lolexs and Almanis over there 

Never been there (never been to Asia) but would be nice to see the nuclear rocket parade... and I know where my little Red Book is, right there on the shelf next to the Marx and Mein Kampf  I just proved spontaneous combustion doesn't exist


----------



## Adz

been playing around while have 5 mins to myself. here i have a couple pics ,

Lum-tec 500m-1










followed by the pyro lume aviator titanium carbon fibre classic ( brilliant two coloured lum difficult to capture on cam )










lastly the Lum tec and Seiko Snda132p


----------



## Chromejob

Good job(s), Adz and Kutusov. Lovely pics, lovely watches, and great "lume signatures." (I think that's what I must love about good lume ... the dial and hand design takes on a new character with the lights out.)

... Sometimes this can be a hobby for a madman. Holding your arm still (using a timer as well to reduce camera movement), low light, picking the right camera settings, and add to that a handheld lighter to completely muck with the exposure. Rum, sodomy and the lash is a vacation by comparison.

Anyway, persevere long enough and a couple of worthy pics may come out of it. I've got a colleague who recommends Adobe Lightbox as making sorting, selection and editing of images near-effortless, I may yet have to try it.




























I'm going back to the tabletop tripod ... once I've caught up on sleep.


----------



## Kutusov

David Spalding said:


>


Those new hands sure have some strong lume! Have you changed the pip of the bezel too? Seems to glow as intensely as the hands and less than the original markers...


----------



## Boxbrownie

David Spalding said:


> Anyway, persevere long enough and a couple of worthy pics may come out of it. I've got a colleague who recommends Adobe Lightbox as making sorting, selection and editing of images near-effortless, I may yet have to try it.


That'll be Lightroom, its very good.


----------



## Chromejob

Kutusov said:


> Those new hands sure have some strong lume! Have you changed the pip of the bezel too? Seems to glow as intensely as the hands and less than the original markers...


Sorry for my absence, I've been stoking the fires of another hobby ... yes, the hands are superbright, you can see that in my pics of their previous home, my O&W M5. That's part of why I transplanted them here. The Omega hands are IMHO a better match for the C3 green lume than Steinhart's original hands. No, the bezel insert is original.

Drum's new Steinhart Proteus (a forum collaboration limited ed. with Steinhart on WUS) should turn up in this thread very soon, I hope.


----------



## Chromejob

Yes, white balance in the camera is an easy way to overcome such a color temperature problem, but a good photo editor program may be able to help as well.


----------



## Kutusov

David Spalding said:


> Yes, white balance in the camera is an easy way to overcome such a color temperature problem, but a good photo editor program may be able to help as well.


Yeap, or that... so RAW mode, etc.


----------



## Chromejob

Oh, I almost couldn't tell, it's a brother Steinhart. I have used a dim incandescent light elsewhere in the room, or in the next room as in this case:










Dim light is rather easy in the car (in the garage), but getting the lume charged up properly ... with a MagLite flashlight ... requires a bit of patience.










Sorry if these are repeats to this thread. I guess I like showing off.


----------



## Kutusov

Yeap, Ocean One and loving every second I've got it on me. They are much nicer on the flesh!

Regarding the back light, I find that a flat screen is easier to work with. It's much closer to the watch and you can move it/tilt it according to your needs. It's a more concentrated light so you have much more of a chance to use it for your shot rather than compensate for it.

I've used a different back light technique with the Sturmanskie I posted before. With that one I wanted more light on the dial and to able to see the crown at 9. So what I did was moving a desk lamp that was above the watch away from directly illuminating it. Then I used a white piece of paper as a "mirror" to direct a diffuse, weak but white light towards the dial, without flooding it.

The point is, the closer your source of light is, the easier it is to use for your advantage.


----------



## Draygo

This was taken as I got out of my car in my garage, with my iPhone. No tricky lighting, just the garage door open. It's very q&d but gives you an idea of how bright it was glowing . Oh, btw, it's a Getat homage.


----------



## BondandBigM

Taken with my HTC Desire HD in the pitch black


----------



## Kutusov

Draygo said:


>


Is that one of the superlumed ones? (can't remember how GETAT calls them...)


----------



## Draygo

Kutusov said:


> Is that one of the superlumed ones? (can't remember how GETAT calls them...)


Yeah, think so... It's certainly bright


----------



## Kutusov

Draygo said:


> Yeah, think so... It's certainly bright


Funny, I had forgotten about your lume post but I was yesterday playing around with the possible configurations of that very same watch on GETAT... Either I'm copycating you or we have very similar tastes 

Anyway, I ended up with a configuration of a brushed steel one with blue hands... It would be nice, I used to have one of the Marina branded ones in titanium (which I dislike) but these sterile without second hand seem much better!

BTW... :kewlpics: of the 1967 lume pretty please!!!









BTW v1.2: Having the Aristo for a few days now I can confirm it. Absolutely fantastic lume that last a loooong time!


----------



## Chromejob

Oy, what a summer it's been. Enough to make a man sail away somewhere for a few stiff drinks....


----------



## hippo

Just to keep Mach happy


----------



## TONY M

Kutusov said:


> TONY M said:
> 
> 
> 
> My new Eco Drive delivered yesterday with it's nice blue lume.
> 
> 
> 
> Great shot! What's that on/off thingy on the dial?
Click to expand...

Thanks Kutusov!

The on/off indicator you see is the alarm, it is switched on and off by pressing the second crown (if you want to call it that) located at the *8* o'clock position. It is a very nice watch but is really very big and heavy especially with my 6 1/2 inch wrist. The model is the AV0031-59E.

I'll see if I can take more lume shots when I get the chance.

Tony


----------



## Chromejob

David Spalding said:


> Oy, what a summer it's been. Enough to make a man sail away somewhere for a few stiff drinks....


Not happy with those results, I drank a bit more of the rum and revisited shots in Photoshop with a bit more liquid (black-hearted) courage...










I must learn to emulate Kutusov's marvelous play of light, shadows, and darkness.


----------



## Kutusov

David Spalding said:


> I must learn to emulate Kutusov's marvelous play of light, shadows, and darkness.


Oh, it's pretty easy. ISO 400 or above, speeds just a little faster than 1 second, black background, absolutely dark room except for a single source of light - computer screen nearby. Lens closed on the maximum zoom so as not to let too much of the direct light from the screen in and just what is reflected on the watch.

The Citizen is a bad example of this because the damn thing won't sit flat on account of its integrated strap. First one I did with a (Timex) watch stand and I didn't want it to show up.


----------



## Chromejob

I recall applying your suggestion before, some months back, trying to use a Thinkpad screen. Late last night -- well, early this morning -- I played with an old Casio PDA screen (an app with a "flashlight" mode) for key lighting, and very long exposures in almost complete darkness. Got some interesting results....










Then this morning I realized -- d'oh! -- that if I'd reversed the angle, I could try to get a highlight off a signed crown. Of course, while adjusting all the lights and angles and tripod and such, I missed the obvious, sliding the watch over on the stand to obscure the acrylic. Ah well live and learn, live some more, learn some more. Definitely fun getting all these shots with the Fuji E900 in extreme manual mode, then using Adobe Bridge and Photoshop to select and further adjust the best of the results.


----------



## Kutusov

That second one is really nice! Not an easy watch to take a picture to, with all the black IP.

It's difficult to comment on the first one... the camera is going with some extreme ISOs but the shutter speed is set at least for 3 seconds. So I think it couldn't be any better... lower ISO settings would mean a lot slower shutter speed and vice-versa.


----------



## Chromejob

Kutusov said:


> It's difficult to comment on the first one... the camera is going with some extreme ISOs but the shutter speed is set at least for 3 seconds. So I think it couldn't be any better... lower ISO settings would mean a lot slower shutter speed and vice-versa.


Thank you sir!

I took nearly a hundred shots, some "bracketing" (another advanced feature I forget about), and yes some messing about with ISO as well as shutter speed. I didn't get much luck with very low ASA (< 200) or higher ... it all seemed to hinge on the aperture and shutter speed. Here's an alternate of that Orient ER1S pic, I couldn't decide which I liked better; one has great highlighting of the dial textures, another has a better indication of the crisp numerals and you can see the dial printing (Orient marque, "STI" logo) clearer. (Here's a pic of the Steinhart OBDLC from the same session.)

Looking at these on my monitor at work (used T43 screen at home), it seems I dialed the mid-point in Levels down unnecessarily ... may have to go back and adjust that. This time -- for once -- I kept .PSDs of the images with adjustment layers intact. (Drat! Just realized that I used Curves adjustment laters, but not a Levels adjustment layer. Easy to remedy, though.)

An OCD WUS photo bug's work is never done, eh?


----------



## Kutusov

David Spalding said:


> An OCD WUS photo bug's work is never done, eh?


Nope!! We're never happy! Actually, you resurrecting this topic made me realize I must be missing something on my later photos... I used to be able to get a better light/dark contrast... I'm trying to think about what that might be but I haven't got a clue.


----------



## louiswu

The nights are drawing in, and since there's no light left by the time my kids go to bed i figured i'd try my hand at the dark side.

I've been having fun with camera settings ...kinda like switching all the driving aids off in sports car :to_become_senile:

Ended up taking about 100 pics, only to get a handfull i was reasonably happy with.

No change there then.

So, without further ado i give you a small selection my poor pics.

Laco Pilot





































Can't decide whether i prefer the really dark short exposures, or the lighter long exposures.

They're both pretty funky. I can see many hours of fun ahead experimenting with various setups.

One last pic for now. Seiko lume rocks unk: unk:


----------



## Kutusov

louiswu said:


>


That's by far the best one IMHO! I think you could make it even better by going with a bit faster shutter speed (you were using about 5 seconds) and maybe the next higher ISO setting.


----------



## Chromejob

Kutusov said:


> Nope!! We're never happy! Actually, you resurrecting this topic made me realize I must be missing something on my later photos... I used to be able to get a better light/dark contrast... I'm trying to think about what that might be but I haven't got a clue.


Well, taking a pic in RAW to start with helps. I was telling a colleague about "the joys of RAW" (anyone remember the Alex Comfort, M.D. books?), how you can bypass any JPEG color artifacts and exact much greater control over the white and black points, etc. He wasn't sold on it; that's okay, he's not taking pics like this.

For the shoots I did last weekend, even the best pics are a tradeoff. In fact, I had to go back and re-adjust the midpoint in Levels which looked fine on my laptop, but too dark here on my Dell 24". I did find that using a PDA with a white screen app with adjustable brightness helped ... I think I might ditch the 10 year old Cassiopeia and use my Ipod Classic (surely there's a flashlight app for iTouch/iPhone devices). But once the pics are taken, I find I can start tweaking the light and dark with Levels, Curves, Exposure controls in Photoshop. I know, not everyone has this. Maybe using those controls in GIMP or < $100 alternative (Corel PhotoPaint/PSP)?


----------



## Kutusov

I have tried PS once (yes officer, I do have a receipt for it... must be here somewhere 







). But that thing has so many settings and tweaks and what not that I just gave up completely. I've learned most of what I know of photography on a fully manual film Voigtlander and it already was a big adjustment curve for me when I've changed to a DSLR.

I mean, on the old cameras you pretty much had only the shutter speed and focal points and that was that (and you got to choose the kind of film but once it was inside the camera, you were stuck with it). Now you have to figure tons of other stuff. If on top of that you go with PS, well, there's no end to it! If you master that, of course you'll get much better pictures ... but I honestly don't have the energy and commitment to invest on it. :sadwalk:


----------



## louiswu

Didn't get much time to play in the dark last night due to pesky children, but i did get chance to experiment with a higher ISO as suggested....

It was the Steinhart Ocean's turn in the spotlight. Only got one pic i'm pretty happy with.










I defo NEED a tripod if these are gonna get any better.

Balancing a heavy camera on a cig packet is not the way forward !

Nick


----------



## TONY M

louiswu said:


> I defo NEED a tripod if these are gonna get any better.
> 
> Balancing a heavy camera on a cig packet is not the way forward !
> 
> Nick


Nice photo!

A good tripod makes things 100 times easier and even a cheap tripod is 99 times easier than trying to improvise with anything else. The good thing with having less equipment is that it makes you work and think harder to get results which is IMO all part of becoming a better photographer.

Tony


----------



## louiswu

TONY M said:


> louiswu said:
> 
> 
> 
> I defo NEED a tripod if these are gonna get any better.
> 
> Balancing a heavy camera on a cig packet is not the way forward !
> 
> Nick
> 
> 
> 
> Nice photo!
> 
> A good tripod makes things 100 times easier and even a cheap tripod is 99 times easier than trying to improvise with anything else. The good thing with having less equipment is that it makes you work and think harder to get results which is IMO all part of becoming a better photographer.
> 
> Tony
Click to expand...

Cheers.

Tripod will certainly be on my Christmas list to Santa, if i can wait that long.

It'll be a relief not to have to waste most of my available photo time with finding suitable objects to rest the camera on.

Might be able to spend more time experimenting with lighting and camera settings then.

I doubt i'll ever go down the photoshop route. That way insanity lies !! :tease:


----------



## Chromejob

Kutusov said:


> I have tried PS once (yes officer, I do have a receipt for it... must be here somewhere
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ). But that thing has so many settings and tweaks and what not that I just gave up completely....


It comes down to fewer tweaks than you think. I was just telling someone in PM, there are different ways to do essentially the same thing in PS, advanced users may know which way to choose, but for most of us, one of the ways is sufficient. The dizzying array of functions becomes more manageable once you realize this and settle on your few, favorite methods.

A chapter or two or three with Deke McClelland would make clear that editing a basic watch shot takes about 5-10 minutes, tops. RAW's a bit more intimidating, but I have a 2 hour DVD which makes it much easier. Besides the lack of any JPEG compression artifacts, RAW pics let you make adjustments, open, edit, save ... then a week later make new adjustments, open, edit, save, and the original RAW image is never changed. So ... I can make as many #&@( ups as I like.

I could start a "quick & dirty cleanup in PS" thread (with illustrations) here if there's enough interest.  In fact, last night I changed a couple of keyboard shortcuts so that I can do fully reversible, non-destructive WIPs -- the past year, I've opened, changed levels and saturation and such, then later said "D'oh, i did too much" and had to reopen the original and reproduce my steps from memory (not hard).

These night lume shots are "fun" because once I've got the photo relatively balanced,... comes the challenge and decisions of how much sharpening and color noise reduction to do, since almost ANY results in some loss of something else: detail, contrast, color fidelity. Last night I was trying some stuff to reduce the red glare from the word 'BLACK' in this photo[1] without a) losing the crisp white text and B) not making changes that were clearly evident in the larger pic. Fun stuff.

If you still have PS, install and update it and let's do some group exercises here in the /photography section. Interested?

_____________

Louis, that's an *excellent* pic of your Steinhart O1VR. A desktop tripod will make it oh SO much easier.

___________

Tony, does that Citizen EcoDrive chrono have an additional red hand peeking out? Whatsatfor?

[1]










WHOOPS. That pic was supposed to be resized to 800px wide. That's what I get for editing with a headache.


----------



## Chromejob

TONY M said:


> Domed crystals are much more difficult as they reflect light over a much larger area and keeping light from entering the lens after bouncing off the crystal is quite difficult. To do this I frequently use matt black cloths held in my hand close to the watch without it being seen in the photograph. Sometimes the cloth will be seen in the photograph as there is no other way to do it unless unless you are willing to have reflections in the crystal.
> 
> Hard enough to explain I suppose but you do get the feel for things with practice and patience and I am still learning all the time.
> 
> Tony


I just noted 22", 32", and 43" 5-in-1 reflector screens on Amazon ... including black and translucent fabric. Ordered a 32" one to see if that will work better than my usual "black Bose speaker grill" for reflections. If you can get an orphaned speaker grill at your local hi-fi shop, I recommend that for the "crystal reflection" problem.


----------



## Kutusov

David, I think I can't keep up with you! PS, cloud domes, reflector screens... my head is starting to hurt 

I think I'll keep it simple: I'll take the best shot I can with my limited knowledge and equipment and post it. If someone doesn't like it, they can go and buy the same watch and take a better picture of it!! :lol: :lol:

But seriously, this photography business is pretty interesting and addictive, especially if you starting going around a particular aspect of it. It's only then that one starts to realize the potentials and limitations and to think about its inner workings.

BTW, STOP showing me Citizens!!! I just bought one and I'm feeling weak... I'm now thinking I should get a RC Eco-Drive, especialy after seeing a CB0010 on some other forum


----------



## louiswu

Cheers for the encouragement guys. At last a valid excuse to stay up half the night!

My other Steinhart's turn this evening... The Nav-B.










I tried some higher ISO's again, but didn't get good results at all.

Looks like 800 is the sweet spot with my current setup.

I do need to experiment with different lighting though. Just using a desk lamp under the table at the mo.


----------



## Kutusov

louiswu said:


> Looks like 800 is the sweet spot with my current setup.


800 is pretty much how far my camera goes before starting to get all those little pixel aberrations. Still, it's a pretty high value so you can go with slower shutter speeds. From the picture I can tell that you went with less than a second. Try a slower speed, say a couple of seconds... that might even be too much already but will give you an idea.

What sort of superluminova do those B-Uhr use? Is it the C1? My Ocean 1 uses C1 and it's a bit crappy... but then again, the Vintage GMT goes with C3 but has some kind of tint to give it a vintage look and the lume is even worst. I only own two Steinharts but their lume is probably my biggest (and only) complaint.


----------



## Chromejob

TONY M said:


> ... A speaker grill sounds like an excellent idea David! I just learned something, thanks for sharing that.


I learned many of these tricks from [B]"pg tips' Photography Tips and Hints thread"[/B] stickied in this forum. Worth reading.

Lovely Citizen, that's a neat way to incorporate an easily read alarm hand.

______________________

Kutosov, I got the screen/speaker grill idea from the thread I mentioned, PG Tips recommended a piece of matte ... something ... with a hole cut in it for the camera. I may yet do that with some craft foam from the local arts supply shop. But ... many of my daylight pics, the crystal is aimed off to an angle, so I find I have to hold that speaker grill behind the camera, up and to the left/right. Not hard to do at all, just look at the reflection in the crystal through the camera LCD, you can see when the screen is in position. I just wish my camera's timer was persistent, I have to reset it to 2 secs or 10 secs after every shot. Argh.

I am NOT buying a cloud dome ... I have better ways to spend ~$65!

_______________

Nice pic, Louis. I think in some years ahead, Steinharts will be appreciated for the great watches they are. He has some very distinctive designs (Triton, Apollo).


----------



## louiswu

Kutusov said:


> 800 is pretty much how far my camera goes before starting to get all those little pixel aberrations. Still, it's a pretty high value so you can go with slower shutter speeds. From the picture I can tell that you went with less than a second. Try a slower speed, say a couple of seconds... that might even be too much already but will give you an idea.
> 
> What sort of superluminova do those B-Uhr use? Is it the C1? My Ocean 1 uses C1 and it's a bit crappy... but then again, the Vintage GMT goes with C3 but has some kind of tint to give it a vintage look and the lume is even worst. I only own two Steinharts but their lume is probably my biggest (and only) complaint.


The Nav-B does indeed use C1 white, and the O1VR is C3 green. They're both OK if charged under a bright light before taking it anywhere dark, but the C1 seems (to me) to be a little dimmer if anything. Maybe it's just not painted on the Nav as thick as on the Ocean.

I don't have any major complaints about either of them though. If i wake up in the pitch darkness at 3am both still have sufficient glow to read..... just !

Friday night is almost here, and i have a new tripod waiting for me when i get home.

Guess that means i'll be up all night playing around with shutter speeds and iso settings again.

Will of course post any results that i'm happy with.


----------



## Kutusov

louiswu said:


> Friday night is almost here, and i have a new tripod waiting for me when i get home.
> 
> Guess that means i'll be up all night playing around with shutter speeds and iso settings again.


Friday night playing with a tripod and ISOs?? No sympathy from me!  

Just kidding at getting back at you!







I think I'll also stay in... although I shouldn't... :beer:


----------



## louiswu

Kutusov said:


> louiswu said:
> 
> 
> 
> Friday night is almost here, and i have a new tripod waiting for me when i get home.
> 
> Guess that means i'll be up all night playing around with shutter speeds and iso settings again.
> 
> 
> 
> Friday night playing with a tripod and ISOs?? No sympathy from me!
> 
> Just kidding at getting back at you!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think I'll also stay in... although I shouldn't... :beer:
Click to expand...

i know, i know ! in my defence - i'll be babysitting

although my wife says it's not babysitting when they're your own kids

so what's your excuse ? if i had no kids or wife i'd be out there on the town on a friday night.

.... i think that's what got me into this situation in the first place though.


----------



## louiswu

Really is amazing what you can achieve by twiddling a few setings. :hammer:

I've never seen this Poljot glow before.










OK so it only lasts 5.8 seconds before fizzling out, but there's some life in the old girl yet.

The down side is moody lighting really shows off every imperfection. :thumbsdown:


----------



## Kutusov

louiswu said:


> .... i think that's what got me into this situation in the first place though.


   Had a couple of scares in my early 20s, so I'm extra careful these days... still, you never know!

Unfortunately I'll have to work on a lot of stuff this weekend and my hangovers now last me for at least one and a half days


----------



## Chromejob

louiswu said:


> Really is amazing what you can achieve by twiddling a few setings. :hammer:


Very, very nice shot. The light reflecting off all the surfaces is dazzling. And that watch probably earned every wabi defect, adds to its character.


----------



## louiswu

David Spalding said:


> louiswu said:
> 
> 
> 
> Really is amazing what you can achieve by twiddling a few setings. :hammer:
> 
> 
> 
> Very, very nice shot. The light reflecting off all the surfaces is dazzling. And that watch probably earned every wabi defect, adds to its character.
Click to expand...

Thanks. That Sturmanskie has its fair share of wabi to be sure. I do like it very much nevertheless.

I give full credit the Panasonic DMC-G1 (and my new tripod) for any lucky good results i get.

Here's a couple more....

Poljot Aviator



















O&W MP2063










Cheers

Nick


----------



## louiswu

Kutusov said:


>


That's really nice. Easy to see why this design has endured.

Imagine the original versions shining in all their gamma-emiting radium glory!

Tonight i have mostly been discovering how NOT to take pics of a full lume dial.










Note to self: Use of direct light of lume dial results in 'ghost' minute hands.

Don't do it again.


----------



## Chromejob

louiswu said:


> Tonight i have mostly been discovering how NOT to take pics of a full lume dial.


Turned out nice all the same.


----------



## sheepsteeth

this is my F1. i like the lume on the numbers, i am sorely dissapointed in the lume on the hands, not least because it is such a small ammount but also because it is a different colour.


----------



## Kutusov

David Spalding said:


> louiswu said:
> 
> 
> 
> Tonight i have mostly been discovering how NOT to take pics of a full lume dial.
> 
> 
> 
> Turned out nice all the same.
Click to expand...

I agree! And those Aristos are very, very nice... :drool:


----------



## Chromejob

Please no use of black lights ... this is, after all, the photography section. There is ample help here for the beginning "darkened room" photographer.


----------



## sheepsteeth

David Spalding said:


> Please no use of black lights ... this is, after all, the photography section. There is ample help here for the beginning "darkened room" photographer.


who is that aimed at?

i used an LED torch to illuminate my watch face then took the photo in a backlit room using my kx with a manual (from the 1970s) f1.8 50mm pentax lens.

exif is here


----------



## Kutusov

sheepsteeth said:


> David Spalding said:
> 
> 
> 
> Please no use of black lights ... this is, after all, the photography section. There is ample help here for the beginning "darkened room" photographer.
> 
> 
> 
> who is that aimed at?
> 
> i used an LED torch to illuminate my watch face then took the photo in a backlit room using my kx with a manual (from the 1970s) f1.8 50mm pentax lens.
> 
> exif is here
Click to expand...

Ah! I also thought you were using a black light, there's this blueish hue reflecting on the steel. It's a common enough trick to take a lume shot used by many.


----------



## sheepsteeth

the blueish light is an aftifact of the white balance i was using.

there is no photoshop or editing apart from a crop


----------



## Chromejob

sheepsteeth said:


> ... i used an LED torch to illuminate my watch face then took the photo in a backlit room using my kx with a manual (from the 1970s) f1.8 50mm pentax lens.
> 
> exif is here


Sorry, the strong blue/purple/lavender tint to the foreground (bezel) sure looked like a black light is in use. Didn't notice the background.


----------



## sheepsteeth

could some of the purple be attributed to the colour of my living room which is mostly reds and maroons perhaps?


----------



## sheepsteeth

i chose the wb setting manually and got the blueish effect, designed to match the blue of the numbers on the dial. my original shot was more like the second shot of your casio.

i do think the more purple hues are a product of the room im sat in (the sofas are maroon, the carpets are red and the lamp shade through which the back light is shining is red also) and the way they are affected by the blue biased white balance.


----------



## TONY M

Kutusov said:


> sheepsteeth said:
> 
> 
> 
> my original shot was more like the second shot of your casio.
> 
> 
> 
> Not mine anymore, it's now on a better home
Click to expand...

Kutusov, I also have the Casio Superilluminator (UK version without the Marlin on the dial) and it does not have two tone lume as is shown in your photograph above. Is your model the "Marlin" dial version or not, just curious. I should have bought another when they were $40 last year at Amazon :wallbash: but decided not to do so... now I think they are discontinued. :angry: Best value budget diver IMHO, very nice quality if you can live with the hands missing the markers.

Tony


----------



## Kutusov

TONY M said:


> Kutusov, I also have the Casio Superilluminator (UK version without the Marlin on the dial) and it does not have two tone lume as is shown in your photograph above. Is your model the "Marlin" dial version or not, just curious. I should have bought another when they were $40 last year at Amazon :wallbash: but decided not to do so... now I think they are discontinued. :angry: Best value budget diver IMHO, very nice quality if you can live with the hands missing the markers.


Cheers Tony, mine was also a UK version. The American version with the marlin has only one lume tone also, at least judging from all the photos I've seen of those. I've always thought that we on Europe didn't get the marlin but at least we had the two tone lume... apparently not...


----------



## TONY M

Kutusov said:


> TONY M said:
> 
> 
> 
> Kutusov, I also have the Casio Superilluminator (UK version without the Marlin on the dial) and it does not have two tone lume as is shown in your photograph above. Is your model the "Marlin" dial version or not, just curious. I should have bought another when they were $40 last year at Amazon :wallbash: but decided not to do so... now I think they are discontinued. :angry: Best value budget diver IMHO, very nice quality if you can live with the hands missing the markers.
> 
> 
> 
> Cheers Tony, mine was also a UK version. The American version with the marlin has only one lume tone also, at least judging from all the photos I've seen of those. I've always thought that we on Europe didn't get the marlin but at least we had the two tone lume... apparently not...
Click to expand...

Just checked mine again to be sure to be sure, and yes it is definitely green hands and green dial markers. I bought mine in June 2010 if that matters.

Cheers

Tony


----------



## Kutusov

TONY M said:


> Just checked mine again to be sure to be sure, and yes it is definitely green hands and green dial markers. I bought mine in June 2010 if that matters.
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Tony


Mine was bought pretty much around that date, I got it just after joining the forum... so I have no idea why they are different... Maybe mine was some ulta-rare edition that I've sold at a bargain price


----------



## TONY M

Kutusov said:


> TONY M said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just checked mine again to be sure to be sure, and yes it is definitely green hands and green dial markers. I bought mine in June 2010 if that matters.
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Tony
> 
> 
> 
> Mine was bought pretty much around that date, I got it just after joining the forum... so I have no idea why they are different... Maybe mine was some ulta-rare edition that I've sold at a bargain price
Click to expand...

I remember seeing one on WUS over a year ago that had the two tome lume, perhaps it was yours.  Looks better in two tone from what I can see.

Tony


----------



## Kutusov

TONY M said:


> I remember seeing one on WUS over a year ago that had the two tome lume, perhaps it was yours.  Looks better in two tone from what I can see.


Maybe it was, I'm also a member but I post a lot less over there. Anyway, the lume on these watches is pretty rubbish anyway... not that they need it, the two leds take care of that!... on an overkill sort of way


----------



## Measch

Stowa and the Seiko










Exposure Time: 8.000 s

Aperture: f/7.1

ISO Equiv.: 100

Harry.


----------



## sheepsteeth

just did a quickie


----------



## Draygo

I've been messing about in the dark with a new lens (  ) so thought I'd dig this thread up again...

And it's taken me far to long to say 'nice shot' to Sheepsteeth ^ (sorry) - I like the rich gold.

This is a lume shot of my LLD, in the dark and moody style of Kutusov!










Cheers


----------



## sheepsteeth

Thanks!

thats a nice shot of a beautiful looking watch


----------



## Kutusov

Draygo said:


> in the dark and moody style of Kutusov!


Oh is it?? That's intellectual property then!! Pay up!! :lol: :lol:

Lovely looking watch and a fine picture! I really like this style, it has something about lurking in the shadows that I like


----------



## Draygo

Cheers chaps. I was pleased with it. I like the gloominess but also that you can still see the dial text and the traditional compressor crown texture / grid pattern.

Royalties to follow, Renato*

*one day maybe


----------



## Roger the Dodger

I'd forgotten about this thread, so it gives me an excuse to show the lume on my new yellow monster...this is Seiko's 'Lumibrite', and is so bright when charged that the autofocus on the camera still works, and the autoflash isn't triggered.


----------



## William_Wilson

Here are a couple shot in overcast late afternoon light at f/11 for 6 seconds at ISO 160.

Seamaster GMT.










Seiko 007.










The Omega is 12-13 years old and the Seiko is fewer than 2 years old. The Omega is still my first choice.

BTW, they were charged with a LED Maglite.

Later,

William


----------



## Tom Radford

One of my favs



DSC_7664.jpg by TCR4x4, on Flickr


----------



## Draygo

I've been stumbling about in the near dark again


----------



## Kutusov

^^^^ Very cool photo!


----------



## Draygo

Kutusov said:


> ^^^^ Very cool photo!


Thanks Renato.

And thanks for overlooking the strap choice


----------



## Kutusov

Draygo said:


> Kutusov said:
> 
> 
> 
> ^^^^ Very cool photo!
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks Renato.
> 
> And thanks for overlooking the strap choice
Click to expand...

Well, it's dark, you can barely see it... that's one of those things that are better in the dark :lol:

Speaking of which... I have a ton of paperwork to do, so maybe it's a good time to take a few lume shots of the watches I haven't already


----------



## Roger the Dodger

Seamaster Pro...


----------



## Draygo

^ Nice Seamaster shot, Rog. And I really like Kutusov's last Citizen - kind of arty 

I've been enjoying wearing this Moscow Classic 'Vodolaz' recently, on a sand/gold zulu. And as the lume ain't bad I thought I'd show it off here!


----------



## Roger the Dodger

Draygo said:


> ^ Nice Seamaster shot, Rog. And I really like Kutusov's last Citizen - kind of arty
> 
> I've been enjoying wearing this Moscow Classic 'Vodolaz' recently, on a sand/gold zulu. And as the lume ain't bad I thought I'd show it off here!


Now that's a very cool lume shot...it almost looks like daylight ...was that a very slow shutter speed shot?


----------



## Kutusov

Roger the Dodger said:


> Now that's a very cool lume shot...it almost looks like daylight ...was that a very slow shutter speed shot?


Doesn't look like it... the second hand is moving, shutter speed was set for a couple of seconds tops. I'm also curious about it because there's no aberrations, so ISO settings shouldn't be higher than 800 or so (or Dave's camera is much better than mine, which isn't very difficult  )


----------



## Draygo

Roger the Dodger said:


> Draygo said:
> 
> 
> 
> ^ Nice Seamaster shot, Rog. And I really like Kutusov's last Citizen - kind of arty
> 
> I've been enjoying wearing this Moscow Classic 'Vodolaz' recently, on a sand/gold zulu. And as the lume ain't bad I thought I'd show it off here!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now that's a very cool lume shot...it almost looks like daylight ...was that a very slow shutter speed shot?
Click to expand...




Kutusov said:


> Roger the Dodger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Now that's a very cool lume shot...it almost looks like daylight ...was that a very slow shutter speed shot?
> 
> 
> 
> Doesn't look like it... the second hand is moving, shutter speed was set for a couple of seconds tops. I'm also curious about it because there's no aberrations, so ISO settings shouldn't be higher than 800 or so (or Dave's camera is much better than mine, which isn't very difficult  )
Click to expand...

Thanks Roger. No it wasn't long... Just a very wide aperture, and a well-charged lume. All I did was adjust the levels a bit, so that the shot was slightly lighter (but not much), and tweaked the shadows/contrast. All subtle, because this is what it looked like through the viewfinder. IIRC it was f5.6 for about 1/4 second. Shot in natural light, early evening.

Renato - it's a Lumix micro four-thirds with a peachy macro lens


----------



## Kutusov

Aperture... that's where I've been failing! :wallbash: I've been so concentrated with isos + shutter + ambient light that I've been forgetting about that. All my last crappy photos suffer from maximum aperture and that's why they are so dark.

Must try at least the Citizen again... all the others are typical type A dials with this or that variation.


----------



## jmurray01

My watch doesn't have illuminating hands (I don't think... Maybe I've forgotten), but it does have a series of lights going around the outside of the face, but it fails at lighting up the hands, so it is useless really.

Maybe I just need to change the light battery, it could be getting low I suppose.


----------



## jmurray01

My watch doesn't have illuminating hands (I don't think... Maybe I've forgotten), but it does have a series of lights going around the outside of the face, but it fails at lighting up the hands, so it is useless really.

Maybe I just need to change the light battery, it could be getting low I suppose.



Draygo said:


> ^ Nice Seamaster shot, Rog. And I really like Kutusov's last Citizen - kind of arty
> 
> I've been enjoying wearing this Moscow Classic 'Vodolaz' recently, on a sand/gold zulu. And as the lume ain't bad I thought I'd show it off here!


Wow, what a beautiful watch.

That must be some megapixels you have in that camera, the picture is stunning.


----------



## Draygo

jmurray01 said:


> My watch doesn't have illuminating hands // the picture is stunning.


Cheers mate :thumbsup:

The hands and numbers are, like most watches, only painted with a luminous paint - in this case 'superluminova' I think. Only a few watches have 'tubes' that are chemically lit.

The camera's got 12M pixels I think. But the quality of the picture is down to skill







OK then, careful lighting and quite a bit of fiddling about.

As Kutusov says above, the large aperture helps this image I think. It makes the background soft ('bokeh') and let's lots of light in with a relatively fast shutter speed. Trouble is with a big aperture, you get a very shallow depth of field, so focusing is tricky.


----------



## Kutusov

> That must be some megapixels you have in that camera, the picture is stunning.


Common mistake there, MP don't really matter when it comes to photo quality. It's pretty much about the lens. Also the firmware the camera works on when "translating" captured light into a digital-worked jpeg picture (not an issue if you use a RAW format and then work it with PS or something like that).

Megapixels are needed when printing big formats, I think 12MP is what you'll need to print an outdoor straight out of the camera!! I really can't remember but 3MP is what you'll need to print an A4 sized picture. So 12 MP is overkill for most uses.

Cheers!


----------



## MerlinShepherd

Kutusov said:


> It's like the designer was hanged-over when the boss told him to get a new watch model. I must have thought "Oh bloody hell... wait, I know! I'll pick a Speedmaster, add PO hands and get it a silly dial that looks like the Daytona the other guys make... then I can take a nap the rest of the day" :lol:


I agree, and he also thought that he'd put ll the numbers in because anyone who buys this piece of c**p will need help reading the time.....


----------



## William_Wilson

MerlinShepherd said:


> Kutusov said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's like the designer was hanged-over when the boss told him to get a new watch model. I must have thought "Oh bloody hell... wait, I know! I'll pick a Speedmaster, add PO hands and get it a silly dial that looks like the Daytona the other guys make... then I can take a nap the rest of the day" :lol:
> 
> 
> 
> I agree, and he also thought that he'd put ll the numbers in because anyone who buys this piece of c**p will need help reading the time.....
Click to expand...

What about the new Omega Confuse-a-tron?










Or the new Omega Chav?










Later,

William


----------



## Roger the Dodger

William_Wilson said:


> MerlinShepherd said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kutusov said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's like the designer was hanged-over when the boss told him to get a new watch model. I must have thought "Oh bloody hell... wait, I know! I'll pick a Speedmaster, add PO hands and get it a silly dial that looks like the Daytona the other guys make... then I can take a nap the rest of the day" :lol:
> 
> 
> 
> I agree, and he also thought that he'd put ll the numbers in because anyone who buys this piece of c**p will need help reading the time.....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Or the new Omega Chav?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Later,
> 
> William
Click to expand...

 Bloody hell...my eyeballs have melted! What the [email protected] is that!...


----------



## William_Wilson

Roger the Dodger said:


> William_Wilson said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MerlinShepherd said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kutusov said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's like the designer was hanged-over when the boss told him to get a new watch model. I must have thought "Oh bloody hell... wait, I know! I'll pick a Speedmaster, add PO hands and get it a silly dial that looks like the Daytona the other guys make... then I can take a nap the rest of the day" :lol:
> 
> 
> 
> I agree, and he also thought that he'd put ll the numbers in because anyone who buys this piece of c**p will need help reading the time.....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Or the new Omega Chav?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Later,
> 
> William
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Bloody hell...my eyeballs have melted! What the [email protected] is that!..
Click to expand...

 Insane isn't it? It's on their site under "Specialities" then "Jewellery". 

Later,

William


----------



## MerlinShepherd

Vile, completely vile. Did I say it was vile.... ?


----------



## Roger the Dodger

MerlinShepherd said:


> Vile, completely vile. Did I say it was vile.... ?


Altogether now....one...two...three...VILE!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Edit : how much is it?


----------



## Roger the Dodger

Kutusov said:


> Common mistake there, MP don't really matter when it comes to photo quality. It's pretty much about the lens. Also the firmware the camera works on when "translating" captured light into a digital-worked jpeg picture (not an issue if you use a RAW format and then work it with PS or something like that).
> 
> Megapixels are needed when printing big formats, I think 12MP is what you'll need to print an outdoor straight out of the camera!! I really can't remember but 3MP is what you'll need to print an A4 sized picture. So 12 MP is overkill for most uses.
> 
> Cheers!


I think Renato is right here...You would only need to shoot at 12mp if you wanted to blow the shot up to 3' x 2' (1.0m x 0.6m). This forum software resizes all pics to around the 800,000MP mark (that's about 1024 x 768 MP) As you have to store your pics on a hosting site, it makes no sense to try and store a 12 MP shot when you can store 12 1MP pics in the same place. Every pic I've ever posted on this forum is shot at email size.....watches, bugs, flowers etc.There is no loss of definition. Lets get this into perspective...1MP is email size...3MP (2048 x 1536) is for blowing up to around an A5 sized print...5MP (2560 x 1920) is for an A4 sized print...8MP (3264 x 2448) is for an A3 sized print...12MP (4000 x 3000) is for a pic around A1 size (approx 3' x 2') There is only loss of definition if you try to enlarge a smaller pic, not the other way round.


----------



## Chromejob

Doing some comparison of the MKII Kingston with SuperLumiNova BGW9 (a more authentic (?) white color in daylight, blue in the dark) and with SuperLumiNova C3 (perhaps screen accurate very light green and green in the dark). Brand new so not hard to photograph.... And a beautiful watch (gilt dial markings, gold hands), so very easy to lose track of time doing photography....

(No, didn't bother with screen for the crystal reflection. These were just test shots.)



Click for larger image.



Click for larger image.


----------



## Kutusov

Lovely watches, those! The green lumed one will probably seem to last longer/be brighter for longer but I think I would prefer the white/blue version.

I realized this not long ago but I love gold on black!


----------



## Chromejob

Thanks.  I actually tested them both last night under identical explosure to the same light. After lights out, the C3 burned brighter, clearer. The BGW9 was dimmer. As my eyes gained night vision ability, they were both visible.

In the morning, about 7-8 hours later, the C3 was still glowing a bit, the BGW9 just faintly visible. It's a matter of taste I suppose. On SuperLuminova's chart comparing all their grades (I can't find it at the moment, dammit), BGW9 is just below C3.


----------



## Kutusov

It's just not that David, our eyes pick up the green light better than the blue (maybe that's the chart you are talking about?).

When I got the Citizen Orca with massive lume markings and their blue lume stuff that everybody said was amazing, I was a bit disappointed. It was very strong on the first few minutes and then seemed to decay a lot more faster than the green lume on my NY0040. Subjectively, I would say that the older watch had the better lume, hands down. A few latter I happened to awake up 7 hours or so after both watches had been exposed to the same Sun light and... although the blue lume always seemed stronger on the first hours, after all that time it was the one that kept some visibility. The NY0040 was pretty much dead by then.

Maybe I'm comparing apples and oranges because they are not the same compound but it's just my subjective experience, it always seemed evident to me that the green one was much better.

Anyway, lume is not something important for me except how it looks on daylight, so I prefer the white markers on that watch to the slightly green of the C3. Superluminova C1 would be just fine with me also.


----------



## Chromejob

Not really an artistic lume shot, but taking some q&d pics for a forum design thread (wherein I want to highlight relationship of the sweep second hand pip with hour markers, and the hour hand), with an iPod Touch no less, I realized how lovely elements look when they're in concert....


----------



## Mr Cracker

My Armida A1 on my coffee table, this watch has the most insane lume.


----------



## Chromejob

Holy thread revival, Batman.[1]

Wait, what's this?










It's a Mk II Nassau with 3-6-9 dial!










[1]BTW, there's a new BD set of the entire US Batman series. Supposed to be great. Ah, Lee Meriwether and Eartha Kitt as Catwoman....


----------



## Mr Cracker

Armida A1...it's ATOMIC.


----------



## Chromejob

Finding that a Maratac AA Tactical Extreme flashlight with diffuser is really good for taking low-light, macro shots. A little bounce light from an AA Personal Flood adds to the drama.


----------



## Kutusov

David Spalding said:


> Finding that a Maratac AA Tactical Extreme flashlight with diffuser is really good for taking low-light, macro shots. A little bounce light from an AA Personal Flood adds to the drama.


David, can't you post using a smaller size? Some of us won't still be convinced about buying a brand new microscope :lol: :cheers:


----------



## Chromejob

Um,.... Hehe. It's 2014. 1400 wide (422Kb) images really oughtn't be considered modem burners unless you're on dial-up? I've been away, I'm probably not attuned to everyone's Internet access speeds.

How about this?


----------



## Kutusov

It's fine to post that size, the forum won't allow a big 13MP picture anyway... This is my current speed on a PC that is connected through wifi to a router located on the other side of gods know how many concrete walls.










...should be 100MB...

BTW, is that a MKII?


----------



## Draygo

David Spalding said:


> Finding that a Maratac AA Tactical Extreme flashlight with diffuser is really good for taking low-light, macro shots. A little bounce light from an AA Personal Flood adds to the drama.


Nice shot, David. And a nice watch, too. What the heck is it? Looks Paradivey?

EDIT: Goddam. The very next post I read is your '2014 arrivals' thread. I'm off to Google Graywater! Looks very cool indeed.


----------



## Chromejob

Draygo said:


> Nice shot, David. And a nice watch, too. What the heck is it? Looks Paradivey?
> 
> EDIT: Goddam. The very next post I read is your '2014 arrivals' thread. I'm off to Google Graywater! Looks very cool indeed.


Let me help you out a little...

http://www.thewatchforum.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=94093


----------



## Chromejob

It's still better in the dark....


----------



## Robden

I'm not into and don't want to get into photography. However, I would like to be able to take a decent lume shot.

All I have is a light tent, tripod and a Sony Cyber-shot DSC-T30.

Am I asking too much?

If it can be done with the above camera, any idea what the settings need to be on?

Many thanks for any help/advice.

Rob....


----------



## gimli

You can do it both when it's dark or when it's partially dark. Have your lume charged (you don't want it to be weak). As far as camera settings goes it's all in the shutter speed (slower so that more light goes into the sensor, especially the lume light). You can play around with the ISO and see which combination you like. Normally for best quality you want low ISO but if you don't want the shot to get too dark (and if you want the lume to come up as stronger) you'd want to increase it a bit, maybe gradually and see which one you like.


----------



## relaxer7

Sounds like @gimli knows what he's talking about 

I'm just a point and click man!


----------



## Robden

relaxer7 said:


> Sounds like @gimli knows what he's talking about
> 
> I'm just a point and click man!


 Me to usually.



gimli said:


> You can do it both when it's dark or when it's partially dark. Have your lume charged (you don't want it to be weak). As far as camera settings goes it's all in the shutter speed (slower so that more light goes into the sensor, especially the lume light). You can play around with the ISO and see which combination you like. Normally for best quality you want low ISO but if you don't want the shot to get too dark (and if you want the lume to come up as stronger) you'd want to increase it a bit, maybe gradually and see which one you like.


 Thank you. Just tried at max ISO. Good lume (at last) but quite grainy. I'll try again later but with different ISO settings.

Thanks again @gimli

Rob....


----------



## gimli

Here's one that I took yesterday with the lights out, ISO 100 (minimum on my camera) but I can't remember what was the shutter speed. I too am using a compact camera (a crappy one) at the moment so I believe the shutter speed was "neutral" on mine.



And one taken just now in a room with more light. Camera settings were roughly similar.



The first shot is better in one aspect as I was using a small table tripod while for the 2nd one I was holding it onto a table but still didn't come out as good as the first.

Always try to keep the ISO as low as possible otherwise quality decreases, unless you have a 5000$ camera. Those are a different thing altogether though. :tongue:


----------



## William_Wilson

Low ISO = high quality but requires longer shutter speed and/or wider aperture, in other words more light.

Low shutter speed = more light but requires a tripod, also use the camera's timer function to fire the shutter so that you minimize wiggle and shake.

F-stop = amount of light that passes through the lens. A smaller number means more light (i.e. f/3.5), a larger number means less light (i.e. f/16).

Use an LED flashlight/torch (even a small one) to charge the lume. While charging the lume you can pre-focus the camera by pressing the shutter button part way down. Turn off the flashlight/torch and finish pressing the shutter button.

You are somewhat limited in your choice of exposure controls with the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-T30 but you do have an EV adjustment in the menu that will allow you to over or under expose your image.

A few of mine:





































Later,
William


----------



## gimli

Very good idea with charging the lume with a flashlight. I do that too. Of course if the watch is pretty new and it has good quality lume that is already charged then you won't need to do that.

Unfortunately old/low-end compact cameras don't allow many manual functions so the diaphragm size or f-stop as William calls it is most likely not available. There might be higher chances of taking a good lume shot if you have a mid-range phone, though...


----------



## William_Wilson

You can usually gain or lose a couple of stops with EV compensation and/or bracketing. The camera's spot metering may allow you to shift the exposure in either direction under the right circumstances as well.

Trickery is the very nature of photography. :laugh:

Later,
William


----------



## Silver Hawk

A daylight lume shot of mine with slow shutter speed....


----------



## Roger the Dodger

Have you looked at this thread, Rob? Runs to 9 pages of lume shots! :laugh:

http://xflive.thewatchforum.co.uk/index.php?/topic/57052-sometimes-its-better-in-the-dark/&&do=embed


----------



## gimli

@Silver Hawk did you use a phone or a camera ? Nice shot. Also, it just so happens that I was interested in acquiring that Seiko that you have in the shot. Are they any good/interesting ?


----------



## Robden

Roger the Dodger said:


> Have you looked at this thread, Rob? Runs to 9 pages of lume shots! :laugh:
> 
> http://xflive.thewatchforum.co.uk/index.php?/topic/57052-sometimes-its-better-in-the-dark/&&do=embed


 Thanks for that Rog............err! I mean Mr moderator sir. :biggrin: :thumbsup:

Rob....


----------



## Tomh1982

A couple of lume shots from me taken on my slr. I normally only do landscape phototography but thought i'd have a little bash at this. Quite happy for a first attempt but think I could do better & wouldnt mind setting the up on a piece of glass to get some nice reflections.

Certina DS Action

IMG_1348 by Tom Harvey, on Flickr

Longines Conquest

IMG_1344 by Tom Harvey, on Flickr

Cheers T


----------



## Tomh1982

A couple of lume shots from me taken on my slr. I normally only do landscape phototography but thought i'd have a little bash at this. Quite happy for a first attempt but think I could do better & wouldnt mind setting the up on a piece of glass to get some nice reflections.

Certina DS Action

IMG_1348 by Tom Harvey, on Flickr

Longines Conquest

IMG_1344 by Tom Harvey, on Flickr

Cheers T


----------



## DJH584

Tomh1982 said:


> A couple of lume shots from me taken on my slr. I normally only do landscape phototography but thought i'd have a little bash at this. Quite happy for a first attempt but think I could do better & wouldnt mind setting the up on a piece of glass to get some nice reflections.
> 
> Longines Conquest
> 
> IMG_1344 by Tom Harvey, on Flickr
> 
> Cheers T


 Actually Tom you have got the shot of the lume on that Longines pretty much spot on.

David


----------



## Timemachine.fi

Lume photos are popular. Someone should make lume quiz for watches in dark photos and people could guess what watch is illuminating.


----------



## Toddy101

Here's my best lume shot taken with my Samsung Galaxy Note 4.


----------



## Eirewatch

Silver Hawk said:


> A daylight lume shot of mine with slow shutter speed....


 Excellent pic! Thank goodness for tripods and remotes!


----------



## Chromejob

Robden said:


> I'm not into and don't want to get into photography. However, I would like to be able to take a decent lume shot.
> 
> All I have is a light tent, tripod and a Sony Cyber-shot DSC-T30.
> 
> Am I asking too much?
> 
> If it can be done with the above camera, any idea what the settings need to be on?
> 
> Many thanks for any help/advice.
> 
> Rob....


 I had a longrunning thread around here somehwere, "It's better at night…". I think we posted some tips and tricks in it. )


----------



## Chromejob

http://www.thewatchforum.co.uk/index.php?/topic/57052-sometimes-its-better-in-the-dark/&page=9

I'm sure that somewhere in the 9 pages we shared tips on getting lume shots. 

My quick tips:

¬ Use a small tripod or other steadying device
¬ Use the "self timer" feature on a camera or device so you can tap/click, then leave it alone
¬ Charge up with a good LED light or torch, CFL works wonders; don't use a UV or cat pee light
¬ If you can't focus on the dial, focus on the bezel insert or crown. 
¬ Use a piece of black cardboard or photo screen behind the camera to control reflections.
¬ Use a phone, tablet, iPod or something nearby with the display brightness turned down a bit, as a dim light to highlight features of the case or surroundings. 
¬ Be patient. Take a lot of shots. I found I sometimes took 20 or more for a single one to come out well. 
¬ Be extra diligent to wipe off oil, dust from the watch. I've gone in with Photoshop on pics to elminate dust specks, numbering in the dozens when I was careless.


----------



## Chromejob

When I use a translucent shade with a hole cut in it, but holding an iPad or iPad Mini along with the shade, and then centering on the watch ... what a chore! (I have not resorted to using clamps or rubber tipped crisp bag clips, but will have to try that.) I'm sure i've got lots of pics on Imgur where you can see the shadow of the tablet. But since the cameras are usually at the extreme corner, it's not hard as you say to sort of hold the tablet off center so it's not reflected.


----------



## Chromejob

I was just reminded of the old reliable trick of … just going outside for a minute or two. XD


----------



## relaxer7




----------



## animalone




----------



## Chromejob

Roger the Dodger said:


> A new lume shot of the Orca using the method outlined above....still a slight reflection of the edge of the tablet, but a nice enough shot, using pretty basic equipment I think...


Very nice, sir.

I don't have a pic, but I also use a big matte black cardboard/poster board/foam board shade with a hole cut into it for shooting through. Difference from the translucent shade is that this can darken the watch (including the face). Now, obviously this isn't an issue if you're shooting the lume, but you still need some ambient light from the side to work.

I use this for macro shots where I have to get in close. Further way, a black photo shade behind the camera is sufficient.


----------



## Chromejob

Chromejob said:


> I was just reminded of the old reliable trick of … just going outside for a minute or two. XD


Just giving my old thread a little love. Fans of lume shots may want to brew a cuppa and enjoy… Start from post #1. ,)

(Holy cats 'n cheese. 16,000 or so views? Wow.)


----------



## brummie1875

Tonight with todays wear.


----------



## Roger the Dodger

brummie1875 said:


> Tonight with todays wear.


 Great shots, Brummie! :thumbsup:



Chromejob said:


> Very nice, sir.
> 
> I don't have a pic, but I also use a big matte black cardboard/poster board/foam board shade with a hole cut into it for shooting through. Difference from the translucent shade is that this can darken the watch (including the face). Now, obviously this isn't an issue if you're shooting the lume, but you still need some ambient light from the side to work.
> 
> I use this for macro shots where I have to get in close. Further way, a black photo shade behind the camera is sufficient.


 I've got some A3 pieces of matt black art paper....will try your method of cutting a hole in a sheet to minimise reflections. :thumbsup:


----------



## Roger the Dodger

@Chromejob Tried your method. took the tablet out of its case, cut a lens sized hole in the centre of an A3 black art sheet (had to tape the tablet into the right position) and started snapping away. The beauty of digital is that you can take loads of pics very quickly, sort through them, pick the best ones, then crop if needed. These were done with just the tablet, the piece of paper and an LED torch and an offcut of black sparkly worktop as a base. They are nowhere near professional qualityshots, but perfectly adequate to post here...JMHO.

New lume shots.


----------



## Cuppachino

Silver Hawk said:


> A daylight lume shot of mine with slow shutter speed....


 Great shot of the watch..


----------



## brummie1875

Some Gruppo Gamma lume......

GG VANGUARD A-04D by Paul, on Flickr

GG ASCENT A-31M by Paul, on Flickr

GG DIVEMASTER D-01N by Paul, on Flickr

GG VANGUARD T-16 by Paul, on Flickr

GG ASCENT A-03 by Paul, on Flickr

:teethsmile:


----------



## brummie1875

GG Peacemaker.....

GG PEACEMAKER P-02B by Paul, on Flickr


----------



## Chromejob

Always fantasized about having twins...


----------



## Chromejob

themysterybidder said:


> Wow, I am loving the bright lume in the dark! :king:


 Cassie's first automatic, a Seiko 5. :naughty:


----------



## Chromejob

Sophy said:


> How is your Luminovia :clap:





rhaythorne said:


> Still trying to get the hang of this lume shot lark. Not aided by the fact that the screw thread in my tripod seems to be cross-threaded so I can't mount the camera securely and it's wobbling about all over the place. Not too disappointed in this latest effort though.


----------



## Cassie-O

It's always better in the dark! :king:


----------



## Cassie-O




----------



## Chromejob

Well DONE, miss. :clap:


----------



## Cassie-O

Not a good picture as I'm only starting to try and put photography and watches together! But I do believe at having a go. :king:

Baby G in the evening.


----------



## Cassie-O

Again not a great picture but love having an attempt. I'm sure I'll get the hang of it... eventually. :laughing2dw: :king:

Burei in the dark.


----------



## Davey P

themysterybidder said:


> Again not a great picture but love having an attempt. I'm sure I'll get the hang of it... eventually. :laughing2dw: :king:


 For better results I think the idea is to take the photo in reduced light, not complete darkness :yes:


----------



## Cassie-O

Davey P said:


> For better results I think the idea is to take the photo in reduced light, not complete darkness :yes:


 I'll try that tonight. :thumbsup: It's become a nightly ritual before I go to bed I take at least one lume picture! Many attempts until I get one which focuses correctly! Most think it's a bit strange, well not a just a bit strange, just strange! :laughing2dw: :king:


----------



## Chromejob

Some tips:



use a tripod or smart phone mount to keep the camera still


use the "self-timer" feature


position a smart phone or ipod or tablet nearby with the screen on and timeout set at 2-5 mins, this provides a little ambient light to show the watch


tell the camera to focus on the bezel or other case feature, some do that better than focusing on the dial markings behind a crystal


----------



## Roger the Dodger

Another good tip I can offer is that you don't need the room as dark as you think. If you try to shoot in a very dark room, the camera in your phone or tablet will struggle to focus properly. Try shooting in a room/space that is only slightly dark....like a normally sunny room on a rainy day.This way, the camera should still be able to pick up the dial details and logos. Like Dave @Chromejobsaid, try to mount your phone/tablet on a mount of some sort to avoid shake, though if the light is good enough, you can do it freehand...I do. Charge the lume with a good led torch for about a minute, then take the shots.Take them from all angles...some closer, some further away. Then use use your built in editing facility to enlarge, crop etc. If you take enough, you should end up with at least a couple of really nice pics. This Orca shot was done exactly like this.










The bright reflection on the side of the case at the 5-10 past marks is actually sunlight!


----------



## Chromejob

Very nice.

Cassie, you can play with bounced light to highlight the case as @SBryantgb probably did here. In a dark room shine a torch against a wall nearby, so the light highlights the watch case. Or as i did in both my pics above with toy Aston Martins, set a tablet or mobile with white screen (have a web browser up or something), and aim it at the watch. If you bounced a torch at the ceiling, the watch crystal is likely to reflect your ceiling. But if the gentle light source is 90 degrees to the side or top, then the camera will pick up the faint light on the watch head, and the crystal will be clear. This gives my cameras something concrete, so to speak, to focus on. Set the self-timer, put the camera on something like a tripod, or stack of books, and let 'er rip. :wicked: Enjoy the challenge, it can be quite a task, but the successful shot feels like you EARNED IT.


----------



## Cassie-O

First attempt last night with tablet light shining on it. :thumbsup:


----------



## jsud2002

@Roger the Dodger I tried your method last night . Note to self though must wipe dust from the dial next time


----------



## Roger the Dodger

jsud2002 said:


> @Roger the Dodger I tried your method last night . Note to self though must wipe dust from the dial next time


 See...it does work! Great shot, John.


----------



## Chromejob

themysterybidder said:


> First attempt last night with tablet light shining on it. :thumbsup:


 :clap: :thumbs_up: ... Having fun? :naughty:

P.S. Omitted from my tips ... using black cloth or something (dress, drape, sheet, whatever), or in my case a black night table beneath ,further helps focus the light (and camera) on the subject.  As I did here...





















SBryantgb said:


> Its a complete and utter cheat.... all computer generated :huh:


 :nono: As I believe I've posted at the top of the thread, no tricks and gimmicky tolerated. :thumbdown: I've used Photoshop to clean up and adjust the exposure, contrast, etc, but I frown on use of black lights, compositing, etc. (Photoshop rules for taking out that one piece of dust that wouldn't wipe off prior to exposure, or landed while shooting. I would sometimes use it to remove a stray reflection or hot spot.)

Keep it real, please. hoto:



Chromejob said:


> :nono: As I believe I've posted at the top of the thread, no tricks and gimmicky tolerated.


 Not the first post but this one

http://xflive.thewatchforum.co.uk/index.php?/topic/57052-sometimes-its-better-in-the-dark/&do=embed&comment=579982&embedComment=579982&embedDo=findComment


----------



## Cassie-O

Tonights attempt with a Seiko 5. I have been naughty and not worn it as it's Mondays date. 










I did take another but Imgur won't let me submit it, so I will try to upload the other picture tomorrow. :king:


----------



## SBryantgb

themysterybidder said:


> This is an excellent shot. I am in practising the now trying to achieve at least something a fraction of yours! :yes: Much better than your computer generated images! :king:


 I got lucky :yes:


----------



## SBryantgb

themysterybidder said:


> Tonights attempt with a Seiko 5. I have been naughty and not worn it as it's Mondays date.
> 
> 
> 
> I did take another but Imgur won't let me submit it, so I will try to upload the other picture tomorrow. :king:


 Seiko's do make the lume shots easier :yes:


----------



## Chromejob

themysterybidder said:


> Tonights attempt with a Seiko 5. I have been naughty and not worn it as it's Mondays date.


 *Brilliant, miss!! *Now you're a pro. You've got the Seiko LumiBrite in all its glory, can see the fine sunburst detailing of the dial, the lovely Seiko 5 marker, even the bezel, case, and bracelet finish. Bonus points awarded for hand position not blocking dial markings (brand, "5," etc). 10/10, this judge votes. :clap: :notworthy: :yahoo:


----------



## Cassie-O

Chromejob said:


> *Brilliant, miss!! *Now you're a pro. You've got the Seiko LumiBrite in all its glory, can see the fine sunburst detailing of the dial, the lovely Seiko 5 marker, even the bezel, case, and bracelet finish. Bonus points awarded for hand position not blocking dial markings (brand, "5," etc). 10/10, this judge votes. :clap: :notworthy: :yahoo:


 Thank you for the kind comments, I couldn't have achieved anything even remotely like that without help from the members here. :yes: Previously, when I saw lume pictures, I always thought it has to be complete darkness, before I can see the lume. However, now I realise that a little backlight can make all the difference! Thanks again for all your help! I had taken these pictures aswell but couldn't upload them last night for some reason. I hadn't seen your comment about hand positioning then, so that may not be perfect, but I'll post them anyway. :thumbsup: :king:





























This one isn't very good, but still shows the lume.


----------



## Chromejob

Nope, the one you say isn't very good is EEKS-cellent.


----------



## Cassie-O

Chromejob said:


> Nope, the one you say isn't very good is EEKS-cellent.


 My excuse is as follows, it was a ladies watch and they are smaller!


----------



## Roger the Dodger

I can see you're getting the hang of this, Cass...well done! :thumbsup:


----------



## Cassie-O

OK, TMB here again to bore with some more lume shots! 

Another few attempts tonight with my Pulsar Mens Watch PT3613X1. :king:

*






















*

I really like this one with the "double tick" look.

















Thanks for looking!


----------



## Pete wilding

themysterybidder said:


> OK, TMB here again to bore with some more lume shots!
> 
> Another few attempts tonight with my Pulsar Mens Watch PT3613X1. :king:
> 
> *
> 
> *
> 
> I really like this one with the "double tick" look.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for looking!


 Good pics


----------



## rhaythorne

Grrrr. I thought I'd fixed my wobbly 1950's/60's tripod but it obviously still needs a bit of tightening up!


----------



## r-macus

bump


----------



## r-macus

bump


----------

