565875 Sun Oct 19 13:48:28 -0700 2008 30 29 Not About Food 0 4114622 I recently read an article about the new 'Gourmet Mode' some cameras have introduced - presumably with aspiring food photographers and bloggers in mind. http://www.foodandwine.com/blogs/mouthing-off/2008/10/6/Taking-Great-Food-Photographs The conclusion: "...the "Gourmet Mode" essentially combined Macro and White Balance functionalities, bringing dishes into sharper focus and compensating for the yellow tint indoor light can sometimes cast. While I'm not going to rush to buy another digital camera (I think my first will last me another five years), I'll make sure to choose those two settings the next time I shoot a dish." As I'm looking to invest in a new camera, I was wondering if anyone had any recommendations of what to choose? A lightweight discreet digital would be ideal, and anything that works wonders for food photography would be even better. Also, has anyone actually bought a camera specifically for its 'Gourmet Mode' function? And if so, have you seen a difference in your photos or encountered any pros / cons? Sun Oct 19 13:48:28 -0700 2008 151962 DollyDagger 1 4116477 Sounds like a perfect opportunity for someone to take advantage of new food photographers. Camera's are nice,but its all about lighting, styling and the perspective. You want to see some great food shots? Go on flicker.com and there you'll see all sorts of shots done with all levels of photographers, in all sorts of situations all with different cameras. You can click on the photgograher and get information on their camera if that's what you want to know. Mon Oct 20 12:02:59 -0700 2008 4114622 50431 chef chicklet 2 4116849 Not to mention that most professional food photographers often put inedible chemicals on the food to make it look appetizing during the duration of the shoot, which often can take hours under harsh environmental conditions. Any photographer who understands white balance, depth of field and basic composition can get a good capture, with a camera that has a raw mode. Beyond that it requires the expertise of an artist to get the best angle, and photoshop-ist to play with the color levels, sharpness, etc. Most of those camera "special mode" features should be ignored. By the way, google the Sigma SD14 for samples, plus look at the Sigma forum on dpreview.com. The sigma cameras have the Foveon sensor that renders very film-like images, with amazing dynamic range. Paired with the right lens,a tripod, and some basic improvised studio lighting, I think you could get some very pleasing food shots. Mon Oct 20 14:33:11 -0700 2008 4116477 55915 MartinDC 3 4118293 Oh yeah, forgot to mention photo-shop, great point. Tue Oct 21 08:14:45 -0700 2008 4116849 50431 chef chicklet 4 4127110 Right. RAW and Photoshop. The two magic words that will produce decent food shots from even the most basic point-and-shoot digital (at least, one that has the RAW capability). Don't even need to understand white balance. You can fix it later. Ain't technology grand?!? Fri Oct 24 14:52:50 -0700 2008 4118293 11407 JoanN 1 4119295 I use a Cannon Digital Rebel XT with Sigma lenses. I've had no problem. The lens is much more important than the megapixels if you want to submit for print media. Tue Oct 21 13:49:39 -0700 2008 4114622 102066 almansa 1 4127090 The Canon SD1000 on the digital macro setting is GREAT for food. I don't have it yet but my cousin does and showed me her food photos and theyre amazing. I have the Canon SD400. Fri Oct 24 14:41:38 -0700 2008 4114622 112406 Chew on That 1 4127291 I have a D80 with a macro lens. while its less then stealthy at a restaurant, it takes amazing photos in any lighting situation. I will echo the photoshop rec., it doesnt seem fair to all of us that took the time to learn photography, but you really can fix/do just about anything later. You still have to get a good angle and capture depth fairly well but thats pretty easy. Fri Oct 24 16:31:21 -0700 2008 4114622 39457 nkeane 1 4136816 I suggest checking out food blogs with photos that you like and asking what they use. 101 Cookbooks, for example, uses a Canon EOS 20D. Wed Oct 29 12:21:21 -0700 2008 4114622 50030 theuninvitedguest 1 4143685 For pics while dining, I found my iphone takes really good food pictures and it's pretty discreet. Sat Nov 01 23:29:17 -0700 2008 4114622 69044 hsk 1 4149319 Another thought, something I learned on the FXCuisine.com food site. You should have only one key light source. If you can set up a stuidio light with a diffuser of some kind, you will get the reflection of a soft light source on the food, and it will look more natural and more 3D. Tue Nov 04 12:17:58 -0800 2008 4114622 55915 MartinDC 1 4157347 I have done product photography and a whiz-bang camera shooting RAW is nice but not exactly what you want to take into a restaurant and be discreet. I have shot almost all the images I have posted on Chowhound with a pocket-sized Sony Cybershot, with 12 megapixels and closeup setting. A little Photoshopping and you're all set. BTW, some of my images stink because Chowhound can only deal with low-end RGB color settings. Stick with Adobe 1998 RGB JPGs. Fri Nov 07 19:31:57 -0800 2008 4114622 137946 Scargod 1 4157379 my son takes fantastic pics every time he eats out with a sony digital, very slim - fits in his shirt pocket. he rarely uses the flash, and uses salt shaker, water glass, etc. to anchor the camera for clear shots. Fri Nov 07 19:54:46 -0800 2008 4114622 49588 lexpatti 2 4157496 Great idea. I have a tripod/monopod which will fit in my pocket. I could see asking for a bottle of ketchup so you could rest your hand and camera on it. I usually try to refrain from using a flash, if at all possible. I also cut back on the flash level. A fast lens helps. Our goes to F 2.8. Not bad. Fri Nov 07 21:26:25 -0800 2008 4157379 137946 Scargod 3 4157814 ya, he tries to be inconspicuous about taking a pic. I love the creativeness in his shots. Mine is a canon power shot and also takes great pics, close up too but still think his is better (or maybe I'm still learning the right settings for that) Sat Nov 08 06:24:39 -0800 2008 4157496 49588 lexpatti 1 4159835 I have found the macro mode on my Canon Powershot G9 to be great for photographing dishes. Its use above ISO 400 is pretty poor, but it takes pretty good low-light shots for almost-pocket sized camera. Much better than busting out the DSLR in the middle of the meal. Sun Nov 09 10:22:49 -0800 2008 4114622 164426 dwagner6 1 4159999 I got an Olympus 750 Stylus about 2 years ago. It has a cuisine setting. It is tiny and discreet. Ideal for restaurant photos and doesn't bother other diners. Sun Nov 09 12:14:24 -0800 2008 4114622 10285 Candy 2 4160152 Does it say what settings are being used in this mode? If it has a macro mode I'm guessing it's used and it must up the ISO. Do you see any degradation compared to other auto shoot settings?When you say "it doesn't bother other diners", I'm assuming it doesn't use the flash in this mode? Sun Nov 09 13:40:48 -0800 2008 4159999 137946 Scargod 1 4160275 For restaurant photo-blogging shots, I use a Fuji Finepix Z20fd ( http://www.fujifilm.com/products/digital_cameras/z/finepix_z20fd/index.html ). The images can't compare to my wife's Nikon DSLR (she's a professional photographer), but I think they are just fine for posting on the web, etc. It is discreet (it looks sort of like a makeup case or a cellphone); it has a decent macro feature; it shoots OK in low light conditions (if you can put up with the noisy artifacts - I often do some correction in Photoshop or iPhoto)...but what I like about it the most is that it is so slim and light that can do "one-handed" macro shots. (See attached for some sample images). Sun Nov 09 14:50:50 -0800 2008 4114622 145820 fmed 2 4172119 Pretty good shots for no flash. I'm afraid to ask what the first picture is... Personally, I enjoy taking my D300 with the added grip/battery and WA lenses into a place. Kinda like laying your pistol on the table. Thu Nov 13 18:31:52 -0800 2008 4160275 137946 Scargod 3 4172212 Thanks Scargod. I disable the flash for the most part. You can get interesting "arty" shots sometimes when it is too dark. That first shot is Xiao Long Bao. Thu Nov 13 19:17:09 -0800 2008 4172119 145820 fmed 2 4268025 I'm happy with my fuji camera too. I have a Fujifilm Finepix A800. The macro feature is very good and has a stabilizing feature which comes really handy in restaurants if the table is shaky or you've had too much caffeine. After talking w/two photographers during my last vacation I've learned it is all about lighting and how you set up your shot than the camera itself (if you are a non-professional). One of them got their start using a pretty basic coolpix form Nikon. It's like any skill he more practice you get the better skills you develop. For my next big vacation I'm getting a digital SLR but will keep my smaller camera for more discreet moments. Camera phones are good too and it seems with each new phone the options keep improving. Mon Dec 22 22:18:26 -0800 2008 4160275 13030 free sample addict aka Tracy L 1 4172276 When I'm at a restaurant, I rarely care about being discrete, so I bust out my clunky brick of a Canon 5D with a gigantor battery grip, and the classic 50mm f/1.4 lens. It's one of the sharpest pieces of glass out there, and it takes just MARVELOUS photos - rich in color, tack sharp images. The best thing about it is that its aperture is wide enough to capture some lovely photos in even the darkest of restaurants. If I'm shooting something at home, I usually play around with lighting, striving for even, diffuse lighting. I like to avoid harsh shadows and washed out highlights. For this photo of chirashi, I used a hotshoe flash pointed towards the ceiling, and fitted with a Lightsphere diffuser. http://flickr.com/photos/icedhotchocolate/2875230221/ This was probably far longer of an explanation than most people care about. ;) Thu Nov 13 19:45:29 -0800 2008 4114622 11275 Prav 1 4212975 Well, there is "food photography," and then there is "Food Photography." With the former, you are taking a snapshot of your food. With the latter, you are photographing the food of advertising. Think the cover of "Gourmet Magazine." Other than the subject being food, they are night and day. Now that I'm off my little soapbox, what you describe is the former. I have never heard of the "Gourmet Mode," but then I spend most of my day doing the latter, just not that often with food as the subject. Still, as you state, a good macro-mode, quick and accrate auto-focus, adequate depth-of-field (pretty much a given with digitals nowadays) and a flash are the main requirements. It does need to be smallish, so you can dine without a full bag of equipment. These requirements are not really different from a good "travel" camera. The one that has impressed me has been the Canon G10 (just replaced their G9). It is small enough to fit in a jacket pocket, though not the breast pocket. It offers more control than most. The auto-focus seems to be very fast and accurate. The auto-white balance seems quite good. The flash, which is integral to the camera would be the one negative, but that is the same with almost all small cameras, and even some high-end DSLRs. The lighting will be one-point and only from the front. One can add a auxiliary flash, but that adds weight, bulk and takes time to attach/detach. One might think of taping a small piece of drafting vellum over the lens of the flash. Depending on the control that the camera has over the flash, the diminished flash power, through the diffusion material, should not be an issue. For what you are apparently looking to do, it might be the best that you can get. If you are getting more serious, and less covert, then think about using an additional flash, attached via PC cord and held to one side. Then, set the on-camera flash to about 1/3 to 1/2 power, and let the second flash be your key light. I'm so impressed with the G10, that I am going to replace my wife's S60 "travel" camera for one. Now, I've used Nikon since the 1960's, but this Canon is impressive. If it really needs to be covert, you might want to think tiny, almost credit-card sized. Think a digital version of the old Minox "spy-camera," but a lot flatter. Good luck, Hunt Mon Dec 01 17:04:12 -0800 2008 4114622 11329 Bill Hunt 1 4226408 I know this strays a bit - but I'd prefer to shoot food with a view camera. A good majority of stuff I see in food magazines has certain perspective control and whatnot that could only have been done with the movements inherent to that format. Sat Dec 06 21:12:24 -0800 2008 4114622 62700 33limes 2 4262973 This is one of the main differences between photography of food, and food photography. Were I shooting food commercially, I'd be using my Cambo 4x5 with a digital capture back and appropriate lighting. This difference is what I alluded to, earlier on. I am also NOT a fan of the penchant for having one mm of a scallop in focus, while 99.9% of the plate is very soft. There are reasons for using extremely shallow and defined DOF, but to show off a plate of food is NOT one of them. Decades ago, I cancelled my subscription to Condé Nast, because of their art directors' choices in this area. Art is art, but when you are trying to entice readers to travel and dine, cutsie DOF is not a good way to do so, especially for an advertising photographer. Hunt Sat Dec 20 19:41:31 -0800 2008 4226408 11329 Bill Hunt 3 4263497 This is interesting, and very timely. I've been using a Canon S60 for the past few years. Bought it mainly for travel and underwater photography, but in the last year I've been using it a lot for food photography (small eff, small pee). I decided it was time for me to go pro-sumer DSLR, so Santa will be bringing a Canon Rebel XSi. I'm photographing what I cook at home, not what I eat at restaurants, and have been reading up on what various food bloggers have to say about the equipment they use. Many started out with, and recommend, a 50 mm f /1.4 (or 1.8) and I've been thinking that would be a more versatile lens for me than a dedicated macro lens. But your DOF comment stopped me in my tracks. Should I be rethinking this? Am I going to look like an artsy-fartsy wannabe? Sun Dec 21 06:55:27 -0800 2008 4262973 11407 JoanN 4 4264750 JoanN, Actually, DOF is less of a problem with digital, than it was with silver-capture. Matter-of-fact, many work hard to get *back* to the old DOF of by-gone days. Depending on the sensor (do not know th Canon XSi), the 50mm might be a tad long. If one is doing existing light work (no flash, or tungsten lights), then the max aperture of f/1.4 to 1.8 would be good. If one is going to light the food (the way to go), then it is of less use. Close-focusing capabilities (or Macro/Micro) might be more of a consideration for me, than the max. aperture. Last cookbook that I photo-illustrated, I used a 35-135mm Macro on a DX sensor camera. I also used strobe for all shots with about 5 heads in various diffusion boxes/modifiers, plus several fill cards and mirrors for sparkle. DOF was never a problem, as I was shooting at f/11 - 16 for all images. It pays to have 23,000 WS of strobe power at hand. It really boils down to what one has, and what one wishes to do with the equipment. My wife's S60 is our small "travel camera," but will replaced by a Canon G-10 soon. For my work, I use Nikon exclusively (but bought Canon for the widest angle zoom on a PnS body, and it has been almost flawless). I even use Nikkor optics for my 4 x 5's. Still, for a travel camera, the Canon G-10 offers a lot! I would lean towards a good macro, with adequate working distance, were I doing much of this work. I use a 105mm Nikkor Macro with tubes, Proxars and reversing rings, if needed. My 35 - 135mm is only Macro at 35mm, and that's a tad close. I like being able to setup away from my subject a bit, to leave room for lighting and reflectors. I shot it out of macro-mode mostly and probably was in the 85mm (35mm equivilent) range for most of the full place-setting shots. If you really get serious about doing photo-illustrations of your cooking, you might want to look into a diffusion dome. You can soften the lighting by moving the instruments away from the material, and harden it up, by placing them closer. Also, silver reflectors/mirrors can add a lot of "punch." Good luck, Hunt Sun Dec 21 18:00:23 -0800 2008 4263497 11329 Bill Hunt 5 4265509 Bill, Thank you so much for your detailed, and very interesting, reply. I suspect my forays into food photography will go no further than existing-light exploration, one of the reasons the 50 mm appealed to me. I’ve worked with professional photographers in a number of different fields and have great admiration and respect for what it is you do. But it’s not for me. I just don’t have the patience. Nor do I have any aspirations beyond strictly amateur. I would prefer to spend my money on ingredients rather than equipment and my time on food prep as opposed to lighting setups. That said, it looks as though there will indeed be a macro lens in my future—some time after I figure out what the camera and the kit lens are capable of. Mon Dec 22 06:01:21 -0800 2008 4264750 11407 JoanN 1 4228489 My experience thus far has been that taking good pictures is much more about knowing how to use a camera than the camera itself. That's within reason, of course; obviously, your cell phone camera or an eight year old point & shoot isn't going to give you much of anything. I've got a Canon PowerShot SD1100 and it takes pictures that are good enough to wow family and friends, and I think that the problems with the photos beyond that lie in (1) my utter inability to plate anything so that it looks good and (2) the fact that I'm still a total newbie and I never get the lighting quite the way I want it. :D Sun Dec 07 23:55:38 -0800 2008 4114622 194027 nickblesch 1 4271465 As a novice blogger who takes pictures of their food I have found this thread interesting. I havae a Fuji FinePix f440 that I'm not a fan of but with a mini tripod and in better lighting I find that my photos have been getting better. I will try the white balance trick because my photos always seem too yellow. thanks all! WON ------ http://whatsonmyplate.wordpress.com Wed Dec 24 10:33:54 -0800 2008 4114622 92591 wontonfm