|
Myxomatosis
Mar 30, 2008, 9:31 PM
Post #251 of 366
(31568 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 12, 2007
Posts: 1063
|
Heres Week 2 homework from Art School.... Breif was "Light & Dark"
All three shot in the middle of the night under a full moon. The far right one I don't think suits the other two, but I didnt have much to work with (and we aint being marked on it  )
|
|
|
|
|
wes_allen
Apr 1, 2008, 1:53 AM
Post #252 of 366
(31474 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 29, 2002
Posts: 549
|
Some more recent stuff. Exif attached...
|
|
|
|
|
Maxx640
Apr 2, 2008, 10:56 PM
Post #253 of 366
(31411 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 28, 2008
Posts: 31
|
A few close-ups an shots of the sea shore:
|
|
|
|
|
deepplaymedia
Apr 3, 2008, 12:44 PM
Post #254 of 366
(31368 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 30, 2005
Posts: 192
|
Shot my first wedding last weekend, bit of fun!
You may have heard of my clients actually, Simon Carter & Monique Forestier :)
|
|
|
|
|
piton
Apr 3, 2008, 12:55 PM
Post #255 of 366
(31365 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 11, 2002
Posts: 1034
|
great photos everyone!
wes i should have pm'd you i was just in Kentucky for work. man there are some nice horse farms in the Lexington area. i love the old stone fences.
|
|
|
|
|
Paul_Y
Apr 4, 2008, 4:41 PM
Post #256 of 366
(31312 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 7, 2007
Posts: 245
|
Nice work Wes. You have a great sense of timing!
|
|
|
|
|
wes_allen
Apr 5, 2008, 12:13 PM
Post #257 of 366
(31244 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 29, 2002
Posts: 549
|
Josh - cool photos! Weddings are really fun when you have such a great location, and a cool couple to work with. Meet them when they were in the red a couple years ago.
Ption, yep KY is can be a very pretty place, no doubt. I ride my road bike through the middle of some very nice horse farms. Did you make it to the red?
Paul, Thanks much! I have really been off the 10fps a lot lately - going with single shot or with the low speed drive. But, there are some areas, like volleyball, that the speed really helps, as that ball can pass into and out of the frame amazingly quickly.
|
|
|
|
|
Paul_Y
Apr 5, 2008, 1:48 PM
Post #258 of 366
(31239 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 7, 2007
Posts: 245
|
Josh,
To me, weddings = stress!
Wow, Simon finally gets in front of a camera for a change.
Nice venue!
|
|
|
|
|
Myxomatosis
Apr 6, 2008, 10:09 PM
Post #259 of 366
(31138 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 12, 2007
Posts: 1063
|
Ok... here's Week 3 at art school :) "Movement"
Still undecided on what my main body of work will be... perhaps some kind of human interest thing on climbing..
|
|
|
|
|
Myxomatosis
Apr 14, 2008, 2:06 AM
Post #260 of 366
(30927 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 12, 2007
Posts: 1063
|
Another Week day at school... Learned the basic's of flash and controlling flash and ambeint light exposures... This week's assignement "Mixed Lighting"...
I think this set is my best so far, mainly because I think its more my eye/style than my tutors "art" style he encourages us to shoot.
(This post was edited by Myxomatosis on Apr 14, 2008, 2:07 AM)
|
|
|
|
|
blondgecko
Moderator
Apr 14, 2008, 5:38 AM
Post #261 of 366
(30905 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 2, 2004
Posts: 7666
|
Not bad. Are you limited to single exposures for this assignment? If not, you can have quite a lot of fun:
From memory, there's over a 100-fold difference in exposure time between the shortest and longest exposure in the above image.
|
|
|
|
|
pico23
Apr 14, 2008, 9:58 AM
Post #262 of 366
(30886 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 14, 2003
Posts: 2378
|
I always love your panos. this one really looked hard with the exposure differences. Well done!
|
|
|
|
|
blondgecko
Moderator
Apr 15, 2008, 12:46 AM
Post #263 of 366
(30847 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 2, 2004
Posts: 7666
|
 Thanks!
|
|
|
|
|
jenner
Apr 18, 2008, 1:04 AM
Post #264 of 366
(30729 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 16, 2005
Posts: 2
|
here are a couple of my shots.....
|
|
|
|
|
chanceboarder
Apr 21, 2008, 5:28 AM
Post #265 of 366
(30643 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 6, 2003
Posts: 1348
|
Just spent the weekend shooting up at the Kern River Festival. Here are some shots from the Brush Creek race held Saturday. Pretty fun looking run with several nice waterfall drops.
Here is the run
And here are some of the races.
And some of the races after the race just hanging out after the race.
And here are a few shots from the Slalom Race.
More images can be found here: http://flickr.com/...s/72157604647572858/
|
|
|
|
|
pico23
Apr 29, 2008, 11:16 AM
Post #266 of 366
(30542 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 14, 2003
Posts: 2378
|
nice work those kayaking shots are awesome.
looks like a fun run.
A few from this weekend...
|
|
|
|
|
pico23
May 2, 2008, 7:26 PM
Post #268 of 366
(30458 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 14, 2003
Posts: 2378
|
kachoong wrote: pico23 wrote: A few shots from 1997 via recent film scans. [img]http://static.flickr.com/2242/2336517473_d71e5cc3f2_d.jpg[/img] [img]http://static.flickr.com/2012/2336516453_9a60ac749d_d.jpg[/img] What technique and equipment do you use to get your old film scanned? I have a HEAP of old film and slides that I'd love to get digital. btw... you guys all take brilliant pics. I think I need to upgrade the camera.
I have both a Minolta Scan Dual IV and a HP G4050.
I've had the scan dual since 2003, great scanner got it refurbed. It's a dedicated film scanner that can batch scan 6 negatives and 4 slides per batch. Basically not much but the quality is excellent, especially for the price I paid. For current film scanners or higher end stuff I like Minoltas 5400 but it's going to be used probably since minolta is gone. The Nikon Coolscan IV is also a nice looking scanner for the money.
The HP G4050 I just got. I have to say, DON'T even bother with it unless you budget the Silverfast SE (another $100) software into the price. HP makes quality hardware, but the software that runs it is always junk.
The reviews of the G4050 are all poor because of the software, but when you find reviews where people went with the silverfast to run it, they are overwhelmingly excellent.
Anyway, I got the 4050 because batch scanning on the Scan Dual was just ridiculous, considering most of my film scans will be nothing more than web photos.
The G4050 can batch scan up to 30 frames of print film (negatives) and 16 slides. I got it with the idea of basically scanning a roll per day (hasn't quite happened, but when I dedicate myself to it, it's possible). Put them in at night before bed, or in the morning before work and when I wake up or come home I have 16/30 fresh digital images archived.
A lot of my film is over 10 years old, so it's already begun to see some color shifts. This is annoying to say the least and not really a reflection of the scanner quality.
For $270 with the Silverfast I cannot complain. Other options are the Epson V700 and V500.
|
|
|
|
|
kachoong
May 2, 2008, 7:31 PM
Post #269 of 366
(30455 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 23, 2004
Posts: 15304
|
pico23 wrote: kachoong wrote: pico23 wrote: A few shots from 1997 via recent film scans.   What technique and equipment do you use to get your old film scanned? I have a HEAP of old film and slides that I'd love to get digital. btw... you guys all take brilliant pics. I think I need to upgrade the camera. I have both a Minolta Scan Dual IV and a HP G4050. I've had the scan dual since 2003, great scanner got it refurbed. It's a dedicated film scanner that can batch scan 6 negatives and 4 slides per batch. Basically not much but the quality is excellent, especially for the price I paid. For current film scanners or higher end stuff I like Minoltas 5400 but it's going to be used probably since minolta is gone. The Nikon Coolscan IV is also a nice looking scanner for the money. The HP G4050 I just got. I have to say, DON'T even bother with it unless you budget the Silverfast SE (another $100) software into the price. HP makes quality hardware, but the software that runs it is always junk. The reviews of the G4050 are all poor because of the software, but when you find reviews where people went with the silverfast to run it, they are overwhelmingly excellent. Anyway, I got the 4050 because batch scanning on the Scan Dual was just ridiculous, considering most of my film scans will be nothing more than web photos. The G4050 can batch scan up to 30 frames of print film (negatives) and 16 slides. I got it with the idea of basically scanning a roll per day (hasn't quite happened, but when I dedicate myself to it, it's possible). Put them in at night before bed, or in the morning before work and when I wake up or come home I have 16/30 fresh digital images archived. A lot of my film is over 10 years old, so it's already begun to see some color shifts. This is annoying to say the least and not really a reflection of the scanner quality. For $270 with the Silverfast I cannot complain. Other options are the Epson V700 and V500.
Sweet!! Thanks for the info! One day soon I'll need to get those old pics "modernized" before the film decays. I used to use Velvia a bit and those pics are more valuable to me.
|
|
|
|
|
Paul_Y
May 3, 2008, 3:32 PM
Post #270 of 366
(30418 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 7, 2007
Posts: 245
|
Nice work Chanceboarder and Pico!
Chanceboarder, did you use the vivid color setting on your D300 to get those saturated colors or did you use a photo editor?
Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
chanceboarder
May 3, 2008, 4:28 PM
Post #271 of 366
(30412 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 6, 2003
Posts: 1348
|
Paul_Y wrote: Nice work Chanceboarder and Pico! Chanceboarder, did you use the vivid color setting on your D300 to get those saturated colors or did you use a photo editor? Thanks
All of them had levels adjustments in the post processing stage and a couple had adjustments to color or saturation. I've only gone through about the first 800 photos of the 1600 I shot for that weekend. Lots of near identical images though since I was shooting on CH for most of the time and I had the battery grip on there so it bumped my frame rate up some.
Jason
|
|
|
|
|
blondgecko
Moderator
May 3, 2008, 11:13 PM
Post #272 of 366
(30378 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 2, 2004
Posts: 7666
|
Ok, these aren't going to win any prizes, but they're frogs! Very, very small frogs.
Challenge: how many frogs can you count in this picture?
... and I thought this was cute:
|
|
|
|
|
blondgecko
Moderator
May 5, 2008, 1:36 AM
Post #273 of 366
(30340 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 2, 2004
Posts: 7666
|
So the other day I found myself wishing for a macro, while last night I wanted both wider and faster than 17mm f4. Still, I think I did ok.
|
|
|
|
|
pico23
May 6, 2008, 2:48 AM
Post #274 of 366
(30282 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 14, 2003
Posts: 2378
|
Love the macros, not crazy about the star shots. On one hand they are pretty cool, but the other they look noisy.
What ISO and exposure did you use? Lens?
We've all been there, I was all big on building my wide angle lenses for a long time, and then I wanted longer teles. Now I'm convinced I need a 90mm 1:1 macro in place of my extension tubes and belows!!!
The just released 35mm 1:1 Macro I am testing/reviewing for the next month might end up being a purchase as well, if only the 70mm wasn't already ahead of it. If only $1100 grew on trees!!
|
|
|
|
|
blondgecko
Moderator
May 6, 2008, 3:08 AM
Post #275 of 366
(30279 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 2, 2004
Posts: 7666
|
pico23 wrote: Love the macros, not crazy about the star shots. On one hand they are pretty cool, but the other they look noisy. What ISO and exposure did you use? Lens?
Yeah, they're noisy all right. I kinda decided to go for the surrealistic look with them, so bumped the saturation and brightness right up. Experimental, as much as anything. There was no moon - good for stars, not so good for lighting up the foreground... anyway, I'll probably do some more playing around with the best of them, and try to find a more happy medium.
The lens was my 17-40 f4L, at 17mm and f4. Most of them are ISO 800 with bulb exposures (somewhere around a minute, but I was just timing by counting). A couple are ISO 1600 and 30 seconds. Bumped up something like 2 stops in the RAW converter. Looked ok on my home screen (although I was pretty tired, and it's not all that great a screen). Doesn't look quite so good now.
This is somewhat closer to what they looked like straight out of the camera:
Perhaps I'll find some time to do some masking and selective exposure adjustment.
I remember reading somewhere about instructions for adding Peltier cooling to a Canon 300D - would assuredly make a difference, but I think I'll wait until I can afford a spare...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
