 |
|
|
UER Store
|
|
order your copy of Access All Areas today!
|
|
|
|
Activity
|
|
886 online
Server Time:
2024-05-16 14:47:16
|
|
|
 35mmVAman
Location: Charlottesville and Richmond VA.
Gender: Male
They call me Iron Isoceles
 |  |  | What do you think?
< on 11/4/2009 6:52 PM >
|  | | |
The picture of the steel structure behind the fence was "built" out of 3 different exposures taken on the same frame. I did no photoshop on this one thats the raw photo. That was my attempt at a "poor mans" HDR 
The other two have seen minimal work in photoshop.
So whadda you think?
Critique is much appreciated.
Thanks!
The fleet to date: "Betty" 72 Pentax (Miss her everyday), "Sneaky Pete" 85 Pentax, "Thor" 76 Konica TC
|
|
Axle
      
Location: Milton, ON
Gender: Male
Sieg oder Tod
| | Re: What do you think?
<Reply # 1 on 11/4/2009 8:05 PM >
| | | | 1 & 2 need some serious noise reduction.
1 - Crop out the top part.
2 - Good Composition, but the focus is a bit off on the subject.
3 - Strongest of the group, very well done.
Celer at Audax
Para la Victoria Siempre Alemanes! |
|
willskith
Location: Boston, MA
Gender: Male
| | |  | Re: What do you think?
<Reply # 2 on 11/5/2009 1:38 AM >
| | | | Posted by 35mmVAman
The picture of the steel structure behind the fence was "built" out of 3 different exposures taken on the same frame. I did no photoshop on this one thats the raw photo. That was my attempt at a "poor mans" HDR
|
It doesnt work like that. All that you are accomplishing with this technique is a longer exposure and plenty of camera shake. You aren't going to capture any different range doing (for example) a 15, 20, and 30 second exposure on the same frame than if you were to do one single minute long exposure.
grit your teeth in the face of fear. self repression is the true sign of a coward, toss your inhibitions to the wind. |
|
Speed
 
Location: Philly area
Gender: Male
Retired Explorer
| | Re: What do you think?
<Reply # 3 on 11/5/2009 2:54 AM >
| | | | Posted by willskith
It doesnt work like that. All that you are accomplishing with this technique is a longer exposure and plenty of camera shake. You aren't going to capture any different range doing (for example) a 15, 20, and 30 second exposure on the same frame than if you were to do one single minute long exposure.
|
presuming that he's shooting in RAW, that not necessarily true. (his EXIF is stripped)
its very possible to build an HDR from a single exposure provided it was shot in raw.
http://www.flickr....72157604110759604/
http://eirikso.com...-one-single-image/
btw, I'm not an HDR fan. I can count the HDR's I've done on one hand.
although I dont have the distain for it that some people have its just not something that fits in my workflow.
let the HDR debate begin...
and Will, I'm not calling you out so dont go getting all butt hurt that I disagreed. you're a capable photographer.
on topic: no offense intended VAman but all three of the images are very weak.
technique or post production is not a cure all or fix for a poor photo or lack of content.
look at it like a house. its only as strong as its foundation. you have to begin with a strong photo from the start before you start throwing a bunch of post work on top of it.
A photo MUST be... in focus, well lit, properly exposed and well composed.
unfortunately you havent achieved any of those with these photos
a photo should stand on it own before even one photoshop action is thrown on top of it.
2 - is compositional the strongest of the set. the leaf needs to be sharp!
1 - could work if it was tighter on the structure, in focus and didnt the huge dark distraction at the top.
3 - shoot it vertically and fill the frame and again focus.
keep at it though!
R.I.P. NickSan | R.I.P. Don Corleyone |
|
35mmVAman
Location: Charlottesville and Richmond VA.
Gender: Male
They call me Iron Isoceles
| | | Re: What do you think?
<Reply # 4 on 11/5/2009 5:16 AM >
| | | | I'm shooting film, so there is no RAW/JPEG choice haha.
And I agree..that leaf gave me a massive headache trying to focus on it. I've been having trouble seeing stuff in detail lately...I need new glasses bad. Does anyone have any tips for getting this stuff focused right though?
I couldn't figure out why I could only get one part of the leaf in focus. Id turn the ring on the lens, and one part goes out, the other goes in. Probably the most frustrating thing I have ever done with a camera. I believe this is called "front focus" so how do I stop this?
Thanks for your critiques!
The fleet to date: "Betty" 72 Pentax (Miss her everyday), "Sneaky Pete" 85 Pentax, "Thor" 76 Konica TC
|
|
Speed
Location: Philly area
Gender: Male
Retired Explorer
| | Re: What do you think?
<Reply # 5 on 11/5/2009 5:25 AM >
| | | | Posted by 35mmVAman
I'm shooting film, so there is no RAW/JPEG choice haha.
|
in that case, what Will is saying is correct.
as far as focusing... sounds like its time for a trip to the eye doctor my man.
what where your settings for the leaf shot? do you remember?
R.I.P. NickSan | R.I.P. Don Corleyone |
|
35mmVAman
Location: Charlottesville and Richmond VA.
Gender: Male
They call me Iron Isoceles
| | | Re: What do you think?
<Reply # 6 on 11/5/2009 6:10 AM >
| | | | I don't understand why that wouldn't work. Provided I keep the film wound hella tight up on the roll, and am more carefull with the camera shake, this should work. I definetly turned some brown grass red this morning because I used a long exposure and the red from the sunrise made the grass red. So..if I use 3 exposures, that means different colors.
More detail please..I am very interested in the technical limitation this implies.
And yeah..I REALLY need to see an eye doctor, I can barely read as it is with these glasses I have now. The lenses look like a cat clawed at them for a while.
The fleet to date: "Betty" 72 Pentax (Miss her everyday), "Sneaky Pete" 85 Pentax, "Thor" 76 Konica TC
|
|
Speed
Location: Philly area
Gender: Male
Retired Explorer
| | Re: What do you think?
<Reply # 7 on 11/5/2009 6:33 AM >
| | | | this explains it well:
while I am no expert in this field, I believe the basic principles will still apply: if on the first exposure, an area of film emulsion equivalent to a pixel is fully exposed, further exposure of that area will have no effect, so '+1 stop over' won't add to it and niether will '-1 stop under' take away from it. The top end of the tone curve is fixed by the emulsion/developing combination (effectively fixing the emulsion's speed, or ISO rating). So an area that was almost fully exposed initially will be pushed into saturation by the subsequent exposures, 'blowing' the highlights.
I can see how it will appear to work though; because the darker areas of the picture will gain from the additive effects of subsequent exposures. One expects highlights to be 'blown' out, so the eye only sees the positive benefits (gain) in the darker areas.
|
http://www.cambrid...forums/thread6.htm
R.I.P. NickSan | R.I.P. Don Corleyone |
|
35mmVAman
Location: Charlottesville and Richmond VA.
Gender: Male
They call me Iron Isoceles
| | | Re: What do you think?
<Reply # 8 on 11/5/2009 8:32 AM >
| | | | Ok that makes a little better sense and is the best explanation Ive heard yet. T
Thanks for the link and good info!
Guess I'll be on my way to the eye doctor soon.
The fleet to date: "Betty" 72 Pentax (Miss her everyday), "Sneaky Pete" 85 Pentax, "Thor" 76 Konica TC
|
|
willskith
Location: Boston, MA
Gender: Male
| | | | Re: What do you think?
<Reply # 9 on 11/5/2009 2:38 PM >
| | | | HDR is a digital processing technique. It is done in post, not with the camera. You can't really do it with film. I mean, I guess you could, but why? Film already has a few stops more latitude than digital. But youre going to be struggling getting the images aligned perfectly if you were to merge them, since each frame isn't going to be scanned to the exact same crop.
About the leaf... provided this was shot on a tripod, it probably moved a little during the exposure. I've tried shooting things in spider webs in dark places and they never come out well since the web moves a little bit, and you can't really notice it. Over 15 seconds, just a few small movements in a web can render the whole thing a blur.
With that first one, were you standing under something and it got in your frame, or was the film offset when it was scanned?
grit your teeth in the face of fear. self repression is the true sign of a coward, toss your inhibitions to the wind. |
|
35mmVAman
Location: Charlottesville and Richmond VA.
Gender: Male
They call me Iron Isoceles
| | | Re: What do you think?
<Reply # 10 on 11/5/2009 11:12 PM >
| | | | The top part of the first photo is a partial frame merge that happened while it was being scanned.
I did notice that there was a VERY slight breeze moving the web while I was trying to focus on it. I used a tripod with a cable release for all 3 shots actually. It was definitely dark in that house with the web though.
The fleet to date: "Betty" 72 Pentax (Miss her everyday), "Sneaky Pete" 85 Pentax, "Thor" 76 Konica TC
|
|
|
|
All content and images copyright © 2002-2024 UER.CA and respective creators. Graphical Design by Crossfire.
To contact webmaster, or click to email with problems or other questions about this site:
UER CONTACT
View Terms of Service |
View Privacy Policy |
Server colocation provided by Beanfield
This page was generated for you in 156 milliseconds. Since June 23, 2002, a total of 741951374 pages have been generated.
|
|
