Photographing FIRE? - DPChallenge Forums

Samsung Galaxy S21, S21+, S21 Ultra

01/14/2006 08:01:08 AM · #1

I've tried to take a shot of fire burning but I was not able to make it sharp enough. Actually, couldn't stop the motion...

here's one of the outtakes

Anyone has a tip for doing this?

Bear_Music

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

01/14/2006 08:04:17 AM · #2

It would be a lot easier to help you if you told us the technical details; ISO, f/stop, shutter speed, you know the drill....

R.

Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS

01/14/2006 08:09:14 AM · #3

Oh yeah,

f/3.5
exp 1/60s
iso 64(i tried to use lowest possible because at iso 200 or 300 it gets so noisy)...
This was shoot in my fireplace in complete dark.

Message edited by author 2006-01-14 13:09:30.

Canon EOS-60D

01/14/2006 08:19:07 AM · #4

I don't have any advice for the fire picture, but your pictures on yor blog of the Belgrade ghetto are extremely moving. Wow.

scottstanton

Canon EOS-400D Rebel XTi

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6

01/14/2006 08:21:24 AM · #5

Well, I've never shot fire before, but I would think that at f3.5 you could get a higher shutter speed than 1/60s. See what kind of shutter speed you can get at iso 100 or try iso 200 and use neat image or noise ninja to fix it on the backend.

Tamron 70-180mm F/2.8 Di III VXD

01/14/2006 08:35:48 AM · #6

I was thinking about additional lighting but I just don't know with what to start, so I was wondering if anybody has actual experience with this kind of shots.

MadMan2k

Sony Alpha a6400

01/14/2006 08:38:56 AM · #7

I don't think you can actually stop the motion of fire without properly exposing everything else and way underexposing the fire (like with a lot of lights).

Since it's a (pretty dim) light source itself, if you light it enough to get a 1/500th shutter speed or so you'll barely be able to see the fire. Has to be a fairly long exposure, and it'll be a little blurry, that's just how it goes.

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G IF-ED

01/14/2006 08:41:14 AM · #8

Originally posted by MadMan2k:

...if you light it enough to get a 1/500th shutter speed or so you'll barely be able to see the fire. Has to be a fairly long exposure, and it'll be a little blurry, that's just how it goes.

that's what i've figured out, unfortunately

livitup

Nikon D70

01/14/2006 09:05:00 AM · #9

Fill flash?

Not something I've tried personally, but I've been itching to try the off-camera remote capability of my SB-600, so I might give it a try tonight. Even without a remote flash you could use something like a bright desk lamp and some cardboard "barn doors" to add fill light to the surroundings...

Just a thought, but you've given me something to play with tonight.

nsbca7

Mattel Barbie Photo Designer Digital Camera

01/14/2006 09:45:50 AM · #10

Originally posted by livitup:

Fill flash may light the burning matter (coal, log, ect... ) but it will pull the color from the flames. Flames are energy and do not reflect light.

nsbca7

Mattel Barbie Photo Designer Digital Camera

01/14/2006 10:25:14 AM · #11

At 1/200 sec there is still blur in the flame, but most of the detail in the logs is lost. I've found that 1/800 sec is good to catch flame without too much blur. I don't recommend flash, however selective lighting aimed at the details you will need lit besides the flame such as the logs or the fireplace may work.

Shot taken:
1/200 sec
f/9
ISO 320
Focal Length 85mm