PETER SIEGEL: Photographing aquariums....

[brewerbob]

I read your article in the Feb issue. I found it helpful and informative but you didn't mention film.

I am a beginner in the aquarium hobby but have enjoyed photography for some years. I am what I would call an advanced beginner. I know most of the terminology, have a fully manual camera, take better pictures than the average point and shoot tourist, and have very limited equipment. In fact, I've lost my flash and need to get another.

I don't have anything in my tank yet worth taking pictures of yet but after seeing Photo and Aquarium in the same sentence, I became intrigued. I would imagine the lighting used to support a tank (different wave lengths and types of lighting) would play havoc on the camera's "eye".

I have 2 Pentax K1000 camera bodies (bougth the second after I found out it had been discontinued), a wide angle 38mm lens, the standard 50mm lens that came with it, and a 80-200mm zoom/marco lens.

Now for teh question(s): Would speed film would you suggest for aquarium photos? Does the lighting require a different speed than would normally be used? You mention lighting and keeping it well above the tank but would you use the tank lighting or camera lights?

And just out of curiousity, have you tried and black and white photos of aquaria?

Sorry about rambling on,
Bob Rogers.

 

[AF Founder]

Dear Bob Rogers,

Q.
Now for teh question(s):

Would speed film would you suggest for aquarium photos?

A.
Of course it depends...If I were to photograph a fish tank with a flash and I could not turn off or block the tank's lights, I would use a slow reversal (slide) or negative film around 100 ASA. I would really only use negative film when using the tank' s light. I would do this because you have the potential of getting better color... slide film would not react well to the tanks lights unless you were to do alot of testing and add CC (color correction) filters; and then you sitll might not get accurate or even acceptable color.

Q.
Does the lighting require a different speed than would normally be used?
A.
If I am using a good strobe.. no/ If I am using the available light from the tank, I would buy faster film.
Q.
You mention lighting and keeping it well above the tank but would you use the tank lighting or camera lights?
A.
I would always use camera lights.

Q.
And just out of curiousity, have you tried and black and white photos of aquaria?
A. Yes... and it solves alot of color and contrast problems.

I hope this answers your questions. :?


Peter Siegel

 

[brewerbob]

Thanx for the info, doc.

 

[mkirda]

Peter,

Can you describe the technique used to get this image?
http://www.advancedaquarist.com/issues/feb2003/10a.htm

I assume that you took the tank lights off and used a strobe above the tank.
Could you describe what you did to take that image? As specific as possible, please.

I can say that I can take some pretty good macro images up to 5:1, but I have not gotten a "tank" image to come out quite that well exposed.

Thanks for the eye candy.
Regards.
Mike Kirda

 

[mkirda]

Would speed film would you suggest for aquarium photos?

A.
Of course it depends...If I were to photograph a fish tank with a flash and I could not turn off or block the tank's lights, I would use a slow reversal (slide) or negative film around 100 ASA. I would really only use negative film when using the tank' s light. I would do this because you have the potential of getting better color... slide film would not react well to the tanks lights unless you were to do alot of testing and add CC (color correction) filters; and then you sitll might not get accurate or even acceptable color.

I'll have to posit the opposite.
Use slide film, ASA100. I like Kodak's E100VS. For a cheaper 'learning' slide film, Fuji's SensiaII isn't bad.

In every single print film shot I have ever done (And I've wasted more print film over the past five years shooting tanks than I care to remember...), not one single frame has anything approaching acceptable color. Now, maybe that has something to do with the processing/printing, but I have found the same dismal results from every lab I have tried, from Qualex to Helix to Gamma to A&I. It is quite disconcerting to take a roll to the local drug store and another to 'the best' local pro shop, and get the same dismal results, one for $7 and the other for $27...

Regards.
Mike Kirda

 

[brewerbob]

Well, that rules out the processing. I'm not a big believer in the film being a big difference either. Some are better than others but Fuji is fairly cheap and has a very good reputation. I don't know anything about slides or medium format.

That photo linked is great, isn't it?

 

[mkirda]

Well, that rules out the processing. I'm not a big believer in the film being a big difference either. Some are better than others but Fuji is fairly cheap and has a very good reputation. I don't know anything about slides or medium format.

That photo linked is great, isn't it?

Well, BB, I don't think it necessarily rules out the processing- It just goes to show that printers have no idea what color it is supposed to be, so they do little to correct it properly. Film can make all the difference- Sometimes print film can be great in certain situations, and be awful in others. An example would be sunny vs. cloudy days.

Slide film, on the other hand, is not correctable. You get what you get, from the light that falls on the subject. You can use ten different slide films shooting the same subject under the same light, and get ten different, yet completely reproducible, images. Most marine images benefit greatly from increasing color saturation- that is why so many u/w photographers shoot with Fuji's Velvia. If you were to compare a Velvia image to one of, say Kodak's Kodachrome, you would find that the colors of Velvia leap off the light table in comparison. Kodachrome is likely more accurate to 'real life' though. Velvia is awful for skin tone (You don't want saturated skin...).

In Medium format, nothing is really different. Just a larger image, so enlargements are clearer and less grainy, given that both are shot with a similar lens.

And,yes, that shot is pretty. Very pretty.
I just hope he will post how he set it up, so I might attempt a few like that.

Regards.
Mike Kirda

 

[brewerbob]

Maybe that is why my grandfather always used slides. He rarely took pictures of people. Almost everything was landscapes or macros of nature. He use to develope his own film too.

 

[mkirda]

Maybe that is why my grandfather always used slides. He rarely took pictures of people. Almost everything was landscapes or macros of nature.

Sounds like me! LOL.
My wife's family is always bored looking at my photos- Why? Because they have no people in them... This last time we went to the Philippines, we took a lot of 'people' photos. MIL still complained... Why? I don't know any of these people, she says...

Sometimes you cannot please people.

Regards.
Mike Kirda

 

[brewerbob]

My wife hates when I pull out the camera. I'll go sit on a gaurd rail and wait a half hour until everyone clears out of the way. I don't want people I know in my pictures and I certainly don't want anyone I don't know in them.

I can go "see" people anytime, I don't need a picture.

 

[AF Founder]

Peter,

Can you describe the technique used to get this image?
http://www.advancedaquarist.com/issues/feb2003/10a.htm

I assume that you took the tank lights off and used a strobe above the tank.
Could you describe what you did to take that image? As specific as possible, please.

I can say that I can take some pretty good macro images up to 5:1, but I have not gotten a "tank" image to come out quite that well exposed.

Thanks for the eye candy.
Regards.
Mike Kirda

]

Hi Mike,

Exactly... there are no tanks light on and I placed the strobe above the water. I also diffused the light source with an umbrella. The light is basically above the image area and slight off to the left to gain more texture.

I saw an area of the tank that would make an interesting background.. and the lovely tusk came by. I actually took about 10 images with the same background... and this was the best overall picture.

Peter

 

[mkirda]

Hi Mike,

Exactly... there are no tanks light on and I placed the strobe above the water. I also diffused the light source with an umbrella. The light is basically above the image area and slight off to the left to gain more texture.

Thanks for the reply, Peter.

Can I assume you used something like a Speedotron, a strobe with diffuser and a modeling light? As in:
http://www.speedotron.com/F10Spec.htm with a lightstand and umbrella?
Would a softbox achieve the same thing?

Regards.
Mike Kirda