Steve's Digicams Forums

Steve's Digicams Forums (https://forums.steves-digicams.com/)
-   Olympus dSLR (https://forums.steves-digicams.com/olympus-dslr-40/)
-   -   Double exposures with the E-500? (https://forums.steves-digicams.com/olympus-dslr-40/double-exposures-e-500-a-107748/)

jimkurta Nov 28, 2006 5:07 PM

Is there any way to do it? I'm not referring to the multiple exposures you could get by setting the camera to bulb in a pitch black room and using the flash to expose the frame to light. With the OM-1 the shutter could be reset without advancing the film. That way it was possible to superimpose an image from one location over a different image from a previous exposure. I think I know the answer to this already, but is there any way to do it in camera with the E-500 (or any digital camera), or does it have to be done in the post production process?

Mikefellh Nov 28, 2006 7:58 PM

No the camera doesn't do it, nor do you want it to.

With digital you have the ability to do it with a LOT more control, on the computer with software.

What you're talking about doing is blending an image with a 50/50 ratio (like you would with a film camera). On the computer you can vary the blend (say 15-85), set the type of blending (and, or, subtract, multiply, difference, if lighter, if darker, texturize, etc. etc. etc.). Once you try it you will never want to do double exposure in the camera again.

In fact, on the computer you can do some double-exposure effects with only a single-exposure, like Ortons. With film you'd either shoot a double exposure with one out of focus, or take two pictures and sandwich the negative after...with digital you can start with a single exposure, duplicate it, blur one of the layers, and then blend them.

Greg Chappell Nov 28, 2006 10:21 PM

There actually are some digital SLR's that allow you to do in-camera multiple exposures just like the "old days", but as Mike says, I'm not sure why you'd still want to when you can combine things with so much more accuracy on the computer later. Check the Nikon line out..I can't remember which bodies, and it may only be the high $$ ones, I just don't know, but they do exist.

Mikefellh Nov 29, 2006 12:04 AM

Quote:

but as Mike says, I'm not sure why you'd still want to when you can combine things with so much more accuracy on the computer later.
Not only more accurately, but also more creatively...plus if you don't like what you did you can always undo it and do it again, and again in another way too...with in camera double exposure you are stuck with the double-exposure you shot.

jimkurta Nov 29, 2006 9:47 PM

I don't necessarily disagree with the gist of what you are saying. Post production and software can definitely perform the tasks that film cameras could do. Nor would I disagree that with software it can be done more accurately and creatively, though creative is a subjective term in this context. I remember discussions years ago with a friend of mine who believed that a digital violin note sound was "more perfect" and preferable than the sound of a real violin note because the violin had imperfections that were imparted to the tone. But to me those "imperfections" are what give depth to the violin tone and makes it preferable. With a film camera, creating a good double exposure involves interpreting two scenes, including light and shadow, angles and other aspects that blend together in subtle and random ways when the picture is processed and printed. Using software can reproduce the technical aspects of a double exposure, but it can't reproduce the randomness.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 4:30 AM.