Such creative photos everyone!
Vegies:
Photo-a-day: NR edition (September)
(167 posts) (25 voices)-
Posted 3 years ago #
-
Thanks monty11!
Let me do a (almost) square too! Baaa!
Posted 3 years ago # -
A technique I always wanted to attempt, needless to say I was quite satisfied with the results.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Space Needle in Seattle
Posted 3 years ago # -
@Regulator75, nice shot ... that must be one hell of a smooth road you got there!
@Gentoo ... mmm that brings back childhood memories when I visited the noodle in 1990. You could try and clone out that lone branch.Double Vortex (no PS effects)
EDIT: Now that I look at it ... I should have cropped it a bit.Posted 3 years ago # -
LOL monty... VR is your friend ;)
Regulator - Did it bother you that KIT kept talking to you while you were setting up that shot?
Nice shots all around. Talented group on this forum. I'm a big fan of the square crop. I hate it when I chop off the top of a landscape picture, and I know the lens captured it... it just didn't hit the sensor. I'd rather Nikon give us the entire square (or better yet circle) and let us do the cropping.
Unless you are shooting hasselbad, the only way you can get square is to chop of the edges :(
Posted 3 years ago # -
@regulator75: I've always wanted to try that technique as well! How long was the exposure?
@gentoo: Nice wideangle shot, it made me look straight up. I've always wanted to visit Seattle.
@monty: Stop it, you are making me dizzy! :-)
Since Willis is a big fan of the square crop, I'll post another for him:
Posted 3 years ago # -
Clouds and rain my eye! It was almost 90 degrees in Seattle this day.
D90 with 12-24mmF4Posted 3 years ago # -
monty11 - I prefer the ground level angle of Your dogs shots, if You want to know my opinion
gentoo - nice shot, You could add polarizer to make the sky look even better, but I really like Your shot
Posted 3 years ago # -
Thanks all, the exposure was 22.5 seconds for the car shot.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Thanks adamz. I actually did darken the sky in capture NX2 here. I have no polarizer for my 77mm lenses unfortunately.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Hey everyone, this is my first post so I hope it all works right :).
I took this photo over the summer in Shasta national park (am I supposed to post a picture I took in September? I have some, but I like my Shasta photos better). It was taken with my D60 and my dad's old 75-300mm push-pull lens, so manually focused. I took several shots of this little guy, and I think this one worked out the best. No cropping or Photoshop work on it. I'm happy with the result (I actually like that the body is a touch blurred, but I will admit that stopping down a bit might have been better), but I'll take any criticism you want to throw at me :).
Posted 3 years ago # -
Welcome to the forum ShadeofBlue. I really love that blue background in your photo. Very nice. You could probably get a little more sharpness into the eyes with software but I'm sure your original is sharper than what we see here. How did you get the little guy to pose for you like that? ;^)
Posted 3 years ago # -
The chipmunks were all really tame there, although this one was easily the tamest. I couldn't have been more than about 2-3 meters away. I basically just kept taking photos until he ran off.
The photo actually isn't perfectly sharp and I think the focus seems to be closer to its nose. I took the photo 1/3 stop below wide open (f/6.3). I don't really have enough experience yet to say if the depth of field should extend to the eye, or if it's a limitation of the lens being near its extremes (fully extended, almost wide open), or if I actually focused farther in front of the chipmunk. I'm inclined not to blame the lens though, since that feels like a cop-out. I definitely have a habit of trying to shoot at wide open apertures. I'm working on branching out :).
Posted 3 years ago # -
ShadeofBlue - taking photos wide open is not a bad habit, it's simply Your choice, I do it all the time, when I take pictures of animals. as for the sharpness it's hard to say on this photo, but I guess it's somewhere between eye and nose tip; as for the background it's really nice - not distracting, a huge con; as for composition, well... I wouldn't framed it this way, as I would probably moved the subject little bit more (around 1inch) to the center, and also I would tried to go lower with my camera (frog perspective), as You were standing with this photo - anyway, I like Your shot, and welcome to the forum
gentoo - You should really add polarizer to Your equipment, get hoya as they have quite good quality and probably the best quality/price factor on the market
Posted 3 years ago # -
"gentoo - You should really add polarizer to Your equipment, get hoya as they have quite good quality and probably the best quality/price factor on the market"
I have polarizers for my smaller mm consumer lenses, just not for these yet.
Posted 3 years ago # -
The interesting mountain thingy
Posted 3 years ago # -
Another shot of Seattle's skyline
D90 with 12-24Posted 3 years ago # -
You really don't want to use CPL filter on your 12-24 gentoo, Hoya or not.
Better solution is gradual density filter for wide lens ...Posted 3 years ago # -
mb: never used one of those. What do they do?
Posted 3 years ago # -
gentoo - CPL - circular polarizer filter, but I have to disagree with You mb, as there are slim versions which can be used on wide angle lenses
Posted 3 years ago # -
Posted 3 years ago # -
Gentoo - I suppose you have asked about gradient filters, they are neutral density (or colored) filters that gradually go to transparent and are used to lower the sky or other bright areas.
Slim or not CPL filters on a wide lens (18 or less on DX especially) will almost always give you uneven sky values (that can be more or less successfully fixed in Photoshop to some extent).
Posted 3 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
