NZG Photographers Gallery

[pxpx]

[lektronimo]

Harsh harsh background. Is this a superzoom lens?

[pxpx]

Just the standard canon efs 18-55, taken through glass though, was just stoked to get the bee in the flower tbh!

[Cyberbob]

Didn't even notice the bee when I first saw it.

Very distracting out of focus background unfortunately... kinda makes you go crosseyed when trying to concentrate on it.

[exo]

made a duplicate layer of the picture, then applied gausian blur until the background "harshness" went away. Then used a layer mask on the blurred layer so the bottom normal image showed through where the flowers and bee are.
Fixed the white and black points of the normal layer, and applied a light sharpen to the normal layer.

[pxpx]

WIN! thanks for that exo

I'll try do that on the high res version and see if I can get the same result

[Jodi]

Nice bit of image rescue exo. Good work.

Oh, and props for Heresy keeping the thread alive, and setting a pretty good bar for quality too.

Now, if I could get away doing up my fucking kitchen for an hour I could actually post something.

Otherwise check out my flickr to see how imaginative you can get taking self portraits in the dark just before bed, because you forgot (for the 48th time) to actually make the effort to take a good photo.

Mind you, I am now getting the hang of isolating myself from a background using lighting (background == dark, me under spot).

[Yoda]

Some from late last year... have most of summer to post process at the moment.

[Yoda]

[Yoda]

Edit - where has the disable smilies checkbox gone?

(Edit Ab - still there for me, enabling me to edit this post to workingness.)

[lektronimo]

^ Hey holy shit, those are pretty damn good. Surprised no one said anything so far... Filters?

[Heresy]

That first one is very nice.

[MoP]

That effect where the water is all 'smoothed out' (like it's been gone over with a photoshop blend tool)... what is that, and how is it done / why does that happen?

[Zephyrus-NT]

Originally Posted by MoP

That effect where the water is all 'smoothed out' (like it's been gone over with a photoshop blend tool)... what is that, and how is it done / why does that happen?

Long exposure time

[Mr Melon]

Damn, those are some nice shots. I like the second one!

[Fred]

Originally Posted by MoP

That effect where the water is all 'smoothed out' (like it's been gone over with a photoshop blend tool)... what is that, and how is it done / why does that happen?

Try an exposure of around 0.5 of a second. The water flows during the exposure and glistens at differing points as it ripples and travels. The long exposure 'adds' all those together producing a smoothed flow effect.

[p01s0n]

Originally Posted by Fred

Try an exposure of around 0.5 of a second. The water flows during the exposure and glistens at differing points as it ripples and travels. The long exposure 'adds' all those together producing a smoothed flow effect.

I'm a real noob, and probably snapshot artist at best. Something I've always wondered with this is how do you get a long exposure without having the image completely blown out?

Recently whilst photographing Perf excercising one of her customers horses, I played around with a low ISO speed (100, 200) and found I was able to shoot at much longer exposures than I normally would (1/250 vs 1/800-1000 in direct sunlight) without massively blowing out the image.

Is this the trick? Usually for bright sunny days we photograph the horses on shutter priority, 1/800, auto iso with the 75-300 nonIS kit lens.

[Yoda]

Originally Posted by Yoda

(Edit Ab - still there for me, enabling me to edit this post to workingness.)

I can click reply, view source, search for "disable" and find nothing relevant.

I'll admit to some pretty dense behaviour over my years, but I still can't find that box. I can see "Automatically parse links in text" but that made no difference when I was previewing my post. Firefox 3.6.3, adblock, firebug, and a few other addons.

[Heresy]

Originally Posted by p01s0n

I'm a real noob, and probably snapshot artist at best. Something I've always wondered with this is how do you get a long exposure without having the image completely blown out?

By using one or more Neutral Density filters.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutral_density_filter

[Mr Melon]

Also stopping the aperture right down, using a low iso too.

[Fred]

Originally Posted by p01s0n

I'm a real noob, and probably snapshot artist at best. Something I've always wondered with this is how do you get a long exposure without having the image completely blown out?

Generally by either stepping the apeture down to limit the light or controlling the film sensitivity (the ISO setting). When you chuck a DSLR into shutter priority mode the exposure meter will finagle the apeture to get a decent exposure for you. The operator generally needs to choose the film speed unless you explicitly set the auto-iso mode.

Recently whilst photographing Perf excercising one of her customers horses, I played around with a low ISO speed (100, 200) and found I was able to shoot at much longer exposures than I normally would (1/250 vs 1/800-1000 in direct sunlight) without massively blowing out the image.

Is this the trick? Usually for bright sunny days we photograph the horses on shutter priority, 1/800, auto iso with the 75-300 nonIS kit lens.

Partly. Shutter priority is you telling the camera that the duration of the exposure is the critical factor. The camera will then adjust the apeture to best meet that target for you. (And in your case the film speed). I've never really found auto-ISO all that useful. The camera firmware usually has some odd bias that either gets it to settle on 400 or 200 ISO.

For what you are doing a little deliberate forcing of the film sensitivity is probably a good idea. 100 ISO is intended for bright sunlight use and as such is relatively 'insensitive' in terms of how quickly it records light levels. 200 is more interior and shadowy areas with 400 and above being strongly for low light levels. As you get more sensitive overall (IE the quicker the film speed) the less detail sensitive and more grain/noise you get. I'd recommend sticking to ISO100 as you will get more detail, less noise and slightly richer colours. (Note with the continuining improvement in sensors often the difference between ISO100-400 is pretty marginal and getting slimmer every year)

The downside to direct sunlight is that it tends to cast very harsh shadows. Depending on how the horses and rider react to flashes you might like to try a little fill-in flash is she is riding close enough or if you can take the shot when she is riding in a shaded area. The softer shadows in the shade are usually more pleasing.

Because the shutter is forcing the apeture then the depth of field you get in shot can be quite variable to the lighting conditions. That is when you might want to change the film speed to force a larger depth of field. Usually if you half depress the shoot button the camera will tell you both the apeture and the the exposure time - that F number will give you a handle on the depth of field. Low F numbers are very shallow so focus becomes paramount, which for a moving target like a rider can be tricky. The higher the film speed then the smaller the apeture has to become and the higher the F number.

[crocos]

Yoda:

• Top of the screen: User CP
• Click on Edit Options on the left
• Scroll down to the bottom of the screen to the "Message Editor Interface"
• Choose "Standard Editor - Extra formatting controls" from the drop-box
• Click "Save Changes"

[Yoda]

Originally Posted by lektronimo

^ Hey holy shit, those are pretty damn good. Surprised no one said anything so far... Filters?

1st - 20-35mm@20mm (old Tokina tank film lens), hand held crappy old Cokin ND grad.

2nd - 20-35mm@22mm, polariser, f16@5s.

3rd - 105mm Sigma macro, polariser, f16@4s.

Waiting for the 16-35 f4, and then getting a Hitech filter holder & filters. Sick of Cokin magenta casts, sick of hand holding for long exposures. Almost always have my dog with me when shooting, and while she's getting better at learning to be still, being able to move back from the camera during exposure will be nice.

[exo]

Originally Posted by p01s0n

I'm a real noob, and probably snapshot artist at best. Something I've always wondered with this is how do you get a long exposure without having the image completely blown out?

Recently whilst photographing Perf excercising one of her customers horses, I played around with a low ISO speed (100, 200) and found I was able to shoot at much longer exposures than I normally would (1/250 vs 1/800-1000 in direct sunlight) without massively blowing out the image.

Is this the trick? Usually for bright sunny days we photograph the horses on shutter priority, 1/800, auto iso with the 75-300 nonIS kit lens.

Need lowest iso possible, and small aperture so less light can come through the lens. Or use a filter to cut out some light, Neutral filters or even a polariser will cut out light and make exposure longer. You need to use a tripod with longer exposures to eliminate image blur.

Depending on what mode your camera is in, you shouldn't get blown highlights. If you're shooting in Manual mode then its easily possible to blow highlights. But in Av or Tv mode, your camera should do correct metering for you(use multi-segment) and you shouldn't get blown highlights.. unless the range of shadows to bright lights is quite large aka larger than the dynamic range your camera can capture. In that case you have to shift your exposure down to save the highlights(sacrifice the shadows), you do that with -ev compensation.

[Yoda]

Ta crocos, that works. Explains a lot.

[crocos]

No prob

[Khaddy]

Full set

[pxpx]

Exo I cant seem to figure out how the layer mask works,

"Then used a layer mask on the blurred layer so the bottom normal image showed through where the flowers and bee are. "

Is it a simple explanation or is it quite intensive?

[Mr Melon]

I think I use my d40 more than my d90 these days... sigh.

[TnT]

Originally Posted by pxpx

Is it a simple explanation or is it quite intensive?

When you create a layer and add effects to it, you can essentially 'paint' it in or out using a brush. You set your brush colour to black to paint the layer out, or white to paint it in.

I'm pretty sure that's how it works, I know I'll be corrected, harshly, if I'm wrong

[Heresy]

Melon: great capture. Well cropped too.

[Yoda]

Good summer sunset light at Tunnel Beach late Jan (yeah I'm that far behind in pp)

[Khaddy]

Nice, Yoda.
Magic hour FTW

[Heresy]

Wonderful, Yoda. Bottom one is my favourite because of the starker change in colour, and the full reflection.


I spent Easter in Prague. Took a bunch of pictures. It wasn't as photographically satisfying as other holidays I've been on. Maybe too much beer stifled my creativity. It was overcast for a few days whch never helps either.

Anyway:

[Mr Melon]

Woah that last pic is epic Heresy!

Love how crisp those beach shots are too Yoda.

[Wibble]

Just some old rubbish to bump this thread:

[lektronimo]

Sucks to have stuff on bottom of the page... Old stuff out of the way as well.





What are quick and customisable ways for watermarks? I'm farting about too much with faststone image resizer, might need to employ photoshop...

[Trigga*happY]

edit... bah guess i better learn how to link first!

[Trigga*happY]

Taking a few snaps with my new EOS 500D... Have cut them down in size, and don't know squat about linking etc lol!

[Genesis]

Nice Wibble very much like the second one down.

On a side note, Aperture 3 is friggin' amazing.