Austrian Uhlan

[Techno]

I did try again last night Phil, as we had the Napoleonic figures out for their very first wargame.  The Uhlan regiment did particually well brigaded with a jager battalion in an Advance  Guard type brigade, roughly handling a brigade of French hussars.

The results of the photography were so poor a dare not put them up here.  I don't think the camera is a bad one as I have taken some great shots with it, but these were outdoor shots.  I think lighting is a problem indoors as the flash when used only seems to detract from the figures, and if I don't use it the results are currently not good. Another problem is I don't use a tripod so focusing is harder for the camera. The answer (as always) I think is to be little more serious about it and probably invest in a tripod at least if I intend to take pictures of models.Cheers, Rob 

OK Rob.....

Now....and I AM guessing...
If you try and use the 'on camera' flash from too close in, you'll probably end up with rather (or very) 'iffy' results.
The closer in you get, the more noticeable the lack of depth of field will be as well.
Check your camera's manual to see what the closest distance is suitable for flash....Again, guessing, it'll probably be something between 3 and 10 feet.

If you want to use flash....You could try moving back to the manual's recommended minimum distance.....Use the 'bestest' (sic) possible resolution and click the shutter.
HOPEFULLY.... ....even though the actual subject will be almost certainly tiny in the 'whole photo'.....You should be able to crop the shot....and still have SOME sort of decent resolution with the models......Have a few experiments.....It may work... It may not.

Your other alternative (as you've mentioned) is to treat yourself to a tripod and take the shots on a manual setting with the biggest 'f' stop you can use.

I'm being somewhat hypocritical here, as when I take shots of the masters....I use natural light....hand hold the camera as steady as I can....and take a picture that's basically a 'flat'.....So depth of field is not too critical.
Sometimes it works....sometimes I have to re-take the shot (over and over)....because I'm basically being lazy, and I haven't got the time to clear the desk and 'do it properly'.....which is what I'd really like to do.

Hope that helps.
Remember...when I worked for 'them'.....I had a dedicated room.....and around £10ks worth of equipment to 'play with'......
It was easy peasy then !! 

Cheers - Phil.

[WeeWars]

Thanks Michael. I have in the past always used 1:50 for Napoleonic's which is very convenient for the book keeping side of things, but has the drawbacks (in my opinion) of spoiling the look of units that take hits, and giving too much visual information on the state of the unit to players.

I have changed my mind somewhat recently and have moved towards a small/medium/large method of representing the size of a unit, with the unit itself being organised as its historical model without too much regard to matching it to a (probably inaccurate) returns for the day figure.

Love the blog by the way.

Cheers, Rob 

To be honest, my close-order infantry battalions are all either two, three, or four bases. In effect more realistically 'medium', 'large' and 'extra large' – 'small' being reserved for light troops. Dividing the OOB numbers by 50 just gives an idea of the number of bases that will make a unit essentially small, medium, large or extra large.

www.michaelscott.name/1809/1809austrian-lineinf.htm

[nikharwood]

Nicely done Rob