StarDestroyer.Net BBS

aerius wrote:

The Grim Squeaker wrote:

Statues: I would have preferred a smaller aperture for this one. You've made only one statue the subject of the photo with no clear reason why, and it's not even the one whose face we can see.

Low light. I tried playing with the angles, but couldn't zoom due to the 1/30s limitation.

Get closer if possible so you can use a shorter zoom for less shake, then with practice you can easily handhold down to 1/8 of a second especially with image stabilization. If you don't believe me this is a 1/6 second handhold at a 80mm equivalent, no shake, no blur, all good.

I've tried it, believe me (I love low light shooting) - 1/30 is the lowest I can go without spraying and praying, 1/13 is the lowest I can go with my stabilized 17mm lens while having a chance of evena third of my shots in focus.
My hands aren't very steady . (Probably something's wrong with my posture or button pressing since my hands are fine in other endeavours, low hand-eye coordination aside).

I prefered a larger distance due to trying to play with the size of the area in focus (shooting right up close/Very close means you'll have less in focus even with the larger DOF provided by a wide angle in many cases).
I'll be shooting with a compact for most of the time from now on, and mainly in mornings on the way to study, so DOF (and anything in low light) is going to be much less relevant for me now .

In short, your hands are super strong and stable from squeezing your wife's.. bike. (handles).

The Grim Squeaker wrote:I've tried it, believe me (I love low light shooting) - 1/30 is the lowest I can go without spraying and praying, 1/13 is the lowest I can go with my stabilized 17mm lens while having a chance of evena third of my shots in focus.
My hands aren't very steady . (Probably something's wrong with my posture or button pressing since my hands are fine in other endeavours, low hand-eye coordination aside).

Some people will have steadier hands than others, but the key is practice and putting conscious thought into the whole procedure. The way you plant your feet, hold your camera, your stance, breathing, and a nice soft shutter squeeze, staying firm yet relaxed, you gotta think about it all and practice it. I had to relearn a few things when I went from a film SLR which I held against my face to a digital compact which is held in front of my face most of the time. The grip & shutter squeeze is a lot different.

And if you can, cheat. Lean against a tree, lightpole, fence, garbage can, or other sturdy object to help steady your hands. I was leaning my whole body and my camera arm against a wall for this picture, no tripod here. There's no way I could get it this sharp without bracing myself against something. This was a 2 second handheld shot, it took me a couple tries to get it right.

aerius wrote:

The Grim Squeaker wrote:I've tried it, believe me (I love low light shooting) - 1/30 is the lowest I can go without spraying and praying, 1/13 is the lowest I can go with my stabilized 17mm lens while having a chance of evena third of my shots in focus.
My hands aren't very steady . (Probably something's wrong with my posture or button pressing since my hands are fine in other endeavours, low hand-eye coordination aside).

Some people will have steadier hands than others, but the key is practice and putting conscious thought into the whole procedure. The way you plant your feet, hold your camera, your stance, breathing, and a nice soft shutter squeeze, staying firm yet relaxed, you gotta think about it all and practice it. I had to relearn a few things when I went from a film SLR which I held against my face to a digital compact which is held in front of my face most of the time. The grip & shutter squeeze is a lot different.

I hold the dslr right up to my face and lean it against my forehead-nose to help steady myself.
I used to have 1/50 as my lower limit (though that was with a lens with crappier IS).

And if you can, cheat. Lean against a tree, lightpole, fence, garbage can, or other sturdy object to help steady your hands. I was leaning my whole body and my camera arm against a wall for this picture, no tripod here. There's no way I could get it this sharp without bracing myself against something. This was a 2 second handheld shot, it took me a couple tries to get it right.

I prefer just placing the camera on a solid surface at an angle (the lens cap is good for this along with the strap). MUCH more stable.


I now have a camera (my dad's old sd950) at Uni. Turns out it has a macro (well, digital zoom crop more like it) feature. There goes the degree .

"Be Happy!"

"Ready to work?"


IMG_0008

Silly consumer features

My share for the day.

Yellow Santan flower macro.


Luminous Orchids

The yellow flowers macro is quite nice. (colourful, uses most of the frame, nice green background)
The white flowers just doesn't grab me/interest as much.

I prefer just placing the camera on a solid surface at an angle (the lens cap is good for this along with the strap). MUCH more stable.

It's why I now carry a small tripod.

Another trick: find the shot and if it's static, set the self-timer to two seconds. That way you only have to worry about keeping a steady hand.

Bounty wrote:

I prefer just placing the camera on a solid surface at an angle (the lens cap is good for this along with the strap). MUCH more stable.

It's why I now carry a small tripod.

Another trick: find the shot and if it's static, set the self-timer to two seconds. That way you only have to worry about keeping a steady hand.

I just can't make myself use the tripod. It's not my style. (and when i'm with other people, they don't use tripods either!)

There's a time and place for them. The time being "a lot", granted, but you take architecture shots and they are perfect for those if you can get a good angle.

Bounty wrote:There's a time and place for them. The time being "a lot", granted, but you take architecture shots and they are perfect for those if you can get a good angle.

Failing that, a monopod wedged in one's belt can do wonders.

A selection of fall colours. I aimed for a film like appearance with the photos with both the camera settings and editing.

Just tooling around, mostly.



Route One.



Barrel train.



Sardine carrier. Getting the old-fashioned look with the Zeiss. Looking at the roll I found inside, looks like it was last used in England (Great Britain at least) in the mid-late 1960s or early 1970s.

Where did you find that barrel train?

Simplicius wrote:

Barrel train.

That's an awesome photo. I love the light and colors.

And yeah, awesome barrel train

A compact camera and a laptop improve certain efficiencies. (I'd still prefer a camera with ANY manual controls. Even shutter priority! I'll never get my photocontest pic at this rate ).


Heatturret. There was something ever so vaguely surreal about it, jutting out on the concrete roof.


Some more macro experimentation. This is the only one that wasn't horridly generic/boring/greenish brown. (Great light).


The wall. Or is it a fence? A block of stone? A statue?

Some Fortia SP madness (none really that good, but I think they show the film's unique qualities)

The first picture you took of the sunset scene using Fortia SP this summer looks so much different than the last couple batches, was there something different you did with that photo or is it just the way the film responds to different colours? That one had crazy saturation and wild colours while the recent ones don't look nearly as over the top.

J wrote:The first picture you took of the sunset scene using Fortia SP this summer looks so much different than the last couple batches, was there something different you did with that photo or is it just the way the film responds to different colours? That one had crazy saturation and wild colours while the recent ones don't look nearly as over the top.

It's color response is kind of weird - it is especially strong in red/magenta (rumour has it that this film was designed to photograph cherry blossoms). Also, by the time I hit downtown the skies were seriously overcast and probably putting a damper on the color. However, if you look below, there's a picture I posted earlier; the saturation is strong but not too too strong.

Phongn - the colours in those pics are interesting, there seems to be a much stronger Red/green response, and it's "Warmer" somehow. It's not as good as some of the other crazy films you used, but that's just my personal kink.
The last pic you just showed (lake+tree) is very nice, same or different film?

Pictures from a costume party, unfortunately most of the good pics were of people who might not necessarily want their pics uploaded, so this is what was left. (I was Dr Who. Leather coat, Scarf, tie, trousers, shoes and all!) :


Indiana Jones? No one came as him .


Hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy costume that I invented for a friend . (He was wearing a bathing robe under all that).


One more pic to round things up .

A textbook case of how sometimes you only have a moment to take a shot - The compact was on the setting of 2MP (out of 14, though I usually only shoot at 5MP) and a cloudy WB.
I took the shot, saw the potential, but by the time I was done fiddling with menus and exposure, the sun had come out and blew up subsequent shots .


Biology Life:

Simple and peaceful. (Lots of glaze & haze though, I cleaned it up a bit in post production with Picasa via "Auto-contrast").



Stretch up as I might, I couldn't get rid of the trees. (And photoshopping didn't seem worth the time, as it doesn't detract much, just my sense of neatness).

A friend of mine being very unhappy, for she was forced to stand still on a freezing Saturday evening. Jyväskylä, Finland.


View from the university campus. Jyväskylä, Finland.


Customer at a barber, enjoying a break and drinking his coffee on a balcony overlooking the street. Helsinki, Finland.

Went to NYC, my favorite three photos:

Oberleutnant - Really nice pics. Long exposure for the second pic?
The contrast and cleanliness of the colours in the BW barber pic is excellent. Post production or film?

Still doing a lot of nature, at least on digital.



Surf, Owls Head. Look, Ma, I'm using masking!



Beech leaves, Montville



Tidal flat, Frankfort

@Pulp Hero. I really like that photo of Times Square in the fog.

The first two pics that you posted feel very busy and I don't really have a place to rest my eye. It also feels like the use of black and white there is working against the photo instead of with it. If I were to try and fix those photos I would have had them still be in color but bring the saturation down to play up the wet and rainy aspect of it a little more.

Your third one feels much better. It's less busy and I get a real sense of the scale of Times Square. With the other two, because you've pointed me directly across the street it feels like a much smaller space and it seems to lack depth.

------------

Anyway, here are some photos of the Orange Street Fair that I made a while ago but couldn't get around to posting.







-----------------

Also, on a procedural note, I've changed the rules in the OP.

I edited rule number 2 to clarify it: Basically, if you critique a photo, put some effort into your critique. I've been seeing a lot of low-effort critiques in here and I feel that they are doing more harm than good.

The other rule is at the end of the rules list and is self-explanatory.