Show us your camera's best pix! (1 Viewer)

[Mark Shannon]

Dana, the picture of the Manhatten skyline after 9/11; was that two pictures stitched together?

Also, 98mph fastball one; amazing how you can actually see a short streak the ball made as it crossed the plate.

Regarding the 9/11 picture, and i know this is off topic, I compiled the following images. I just thought it was interesting at the time.

Manhattan skyline from Liberty - Before and After
WTC Sculpture

 

[Mark Shannon]

Dana, the picture of the Manhatten skyline after 9/11; was that two pictures stitched together?

Also, 98mph fastball one; amazing how you can actually see a short streak the ball made as it crossed the plate.

Regarding the 9/11 picture, and i know this is off topic, I compiled the following images. I just thought it was interesting at the time.

Manhattan skyline from Liberty - Before and After
WTC Sculpture

 

[Dana Fillhart]

Mark,

For the flag and Manhattan skyline, that's one picture, just holding the camera sideways. By the way, I have 2 pix facing southern Manhattan from Hamilton Park in Weehawken (where that flag pic was taken) -- both exactly 1 year apart, October 7 2000 and 2001 -- the 2 pix are almost identical, just about the only difference is the twin towers are in one, the other they're gone. I will post them tonight when I get home.

As to the fastball (I'm pretty sure it was a fastball pitch but I don't think it was 98 that time ... Clemens doesn't get that high anyway, I don't think -- 95ish if I remember right) -- I got 2 pix with almost the same delivery position. One has a greater blur on the ball, which kind-of implies it was going faster. But in both cases, the ball was going VERY fast. It was a pretty good game, though -- Yanks won that one. I think I took all the pix with a 1000 shutter speed (shutter priority of course).

 

[Dana Fillhart]

Mark,

For the flag and Manhattan skyline, that's one picture, just holding the camera sideways. By the way, I have 2 pix facing southern Manhattan from Hamilton Park in Weehawken (where that flag pic was taken) -- both exactly 1 year apart, October 7 2000 and 2001 -- the 2 pix are almost identical, just about the only difference is the twin towers are in one, the other they're gone. I will post them tonight when I get home.

As to the fastball (I'm pretty sure it was a fastball pitch but I don't think it was 98 that time ... Clemens doesn't get that high anyway, I don't think -- 95ish if I remember right) -- I got 2 pix with almost the same delivery position. One has a greater blur on the ball, which kind-of implies it was going faster. But in both cases, the ball was going VERY fast. It was a pretty good game, though -- Yanks won that one. I think I took all the pix with a 1000 shutter speed (shutter priority of course).

 

[Mark Shannon]

Dana,

Regarding the Manhatten skyline picture; I only thought it was stitched because it seems very tall, as if not out of (how do I say it) proportion, with the normal size of a picture. Sorry, it's late and I'm not thinking clearly.

I'd be interested, though, in seeing those before and after pictures. It's bizarre how the events of 9/11 intrigued me. When I first heard it, it all seemed so surreal, and even though it didn't affect us that much here in Toronto, it made me feel bad for all the lives lost. Though I wasn't a member at that point, I defintely remember reading members' reactions to it on this forum.

Anyway, enough with the monologue... It wasn't the speed of the ball that fascinated me in that fastball picture. It was just the fact that you were able to capture that streak that it created.

Now that I've got a tripod to work with, I'm interested in working on some long exposure pictures. Any suggestions as to where to start out? I know all the technical terms, such as shutter speed, aperture, and the like, but I don't really know how to implement them into my photography. Right now, I just have it on the Auto setting and am taking what the camera gives me.

 

[Shawn C]

Some Sony DSC-F828 pics

In the car seat

No Fear

After the slide

The Rune

Nikon 4300
Eye to eye

Chewy

 

[Dana Fillhart]

Here are the 2 pix I promised.

07 Oct 2000

07 Oct 2001

The first was a little hazy that day, it was hard to get a clear shot of the towers from 3 miles away at that time. The same day next year was much clearer.

I'm fascinated about the event from an historical perspective as well as reflecting on it for the fact that I witnessed such a horrific thing pretty much directly (although I thankfully did not see the moments of impact and of the towers' fall (I literally missed the first start to fall by a mere second or 2), seeing the debris cloud spread out over the river and downtown from about the same vantage point I took those pictures was ... surreal. That whole day, crystal-clear as it still is in my mind, was surreal. But I have friends who were in the buildings the moment of the attack -- all who survived, save one who was the fiance of a co-worker -- and their ordeals keep the matter in perspective.

It's weird additionally because my day started out here, on this forum, with a post to this thread about Roger Clemens. If it weren't for that reply, I would've been in Manhattan that day instead of showing up late for my train and then trying to drive into the city. Symmetry, I guess -- I didn't think about it above, posting pix of the only game I saw in person with Clemens pitching. He does pitch a mean fastball doesn't he? I like the blurred ball in that pic, too -- it's almost like it's saying "Look at how fast I am." I guess it's kind-of funny seeing a ball flying that fast past the opposing team's batter who's just staring down at the spot it's supposed to be.

As to help with photo tips ... I'm very much the amateur still, so I'm not a good person to help there. Lots of others here who can do that, I'm sure. Also, there is a site for Sony Mavica (and other cameras) users: www.mavican.nu, which has a lot of good info on it (plus a slew of photos from the regulars there).

 

[Thomas Newton]

The aspect ratio of 35mm film, and of the sensors on many expensive digital SLRs, is 3:2 (1.5:1).

The aspect ratio of the sensors on most digital point-and-shoot cameras is 4:3 (1.33:1). So a digital P&S snapshot will look "tall" and "narrow" to an eye that is accustomed to looking at 4x6 prints.

 

[FredHD]

Here are some of my favorites (mostly insects and botany):

Monarch 1
Monarch 2
Flower 1
Flower 2
Chrysalis
The Wife in New Orleans

Here is a: small gallery.

Unfortunately they are not a full resolution, but it's a free website.

 

[Patrick Sun]

Since we are sharing our WTC pix, here's 2 that I took while in NYC for a night about 5 years ago:

Photo 1: Just a sign of the WTC. 107 floors.

Photo 2: Literally Ground Zero. I was in the middle area between the 2 main towers, looked up and thought it'd make for an interesting shot, so I put my camera on a trash can with a flat top, set the timer and opened up the shutter speed to get as much as the ambient light would allow (thus the greenish hue to the photo).

 

[Brett DiMichele]

Mark,

Here are some quick and dirty explanations of various
manual camera functions.

Aperture is a set of blades that are built into camera
lenses. As you change the Aperture number the blades open
and close. The Aperture settings are measured in F-Stops
which equate to the amount of light that is let into the
lens. A small Aperture (F22) lets little light in and a
large Aperture (F2.0) lets almost all of the light into a
lens.

When you hear someone say they shot with the lens "Stopped Down"
that means small Aperture or "wide open" means large Aperture.

Aperture not only controls the light entering the lens but
in conjunction with the Focal Length of the lens it also
controls your DOF (Depth of Field). Generally speaking the
larger the Aperture the more shallow the DOF will be. Shallow
DOF means that if you focus on someone's face for example.
When you view the final image the nose may be in focus and
the rest of the face may be OOF (Out Of Focus) and of course
the Focal Length also plays into the equasion too.

When you want to shoot an image with a deep DOF (as much in
focus as possible) stick with Aperture values in the F7 to
F10 range and adjust shutter speed to yeild proper exposure.

Shutter Speed is measured in fractions of time. The higher
the number the faster the speed of the shutter EG 1/6000 is
1/6000th of a second and 1/80 is 1/80th of a second.

Not only do Shutter Speed and Aperture Values work hand in
hand to capture the correct exposure latitude but Shutter
Speed can also be used to create some wild effects.

Say you take a picture of a waterfall. If you take the
picture with a 1/6000th second shutter the water will appear
as if it has been frozen in time (stop motion) which is
induced by the very fast shutter. If you want the water to
take on a "flowing" look then run a 1/250th shutter and it
will be a long enough exposure that the water will be
blurred but everything else (non moving) will be clear.

A couple of other tips.. If your camera shoots in RAW use it..

Most higher end digital cameras will shoot a RAW file which
is essentially the data from the imager sensor dumped directly
to a file with no sharpening and no saturation adjustments
made in-camera. If you want the best possible images you
shoot RAW and Post-Process later on the PC. Remember that
you are the photo lab and you can do anything to these
photos.

Also many times you can correct for "operator error" with
RAW files. A good example is with my SD10 if I under or
Over expose an image I can always adjust the RAW data up to
2 full stops and correct for my screw up.. Not so easy to
do with a JPEG because you loose quality when you make
these adjustments to a compressed non RAW file.

Carry a 18% Neutral Grey Card.. They are cheap (like $4.00
at B&H Photo/Video) and you use this to manually set a
custom white balance that will be as close to perfect under
the light you are shooting. Default white balance are often
too riddled with color casts because the ligh you are shooting
under rarely matches what the camera's default WB's are.

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

Mark,

For starters, you can use the tripod for some night scenes (like what Patrick posted), some waterfall shots w/ smooth flowing water (as Brett suggested) at say 1/4sec shutter speed, some studio-style portraits, landscapes w/ large DOF during the "magic hour" (ie. that short time just before sunset or just after sunrise), etc.

For night scenes, you can also try long exposures of moving traffic that leave light trails in the photo, which is a popular thing to do. For the smooth waterfall shots, which is also a popular type, you might need an ND filter to keep from overexposing the shots *OR* do it when/where it's dimly lit or very well shaded from the sun -- the Canon G3/G5 and Pro1 are particularly nice for this w/ their built-in 3-stop ND filter.

For studio-style portraits where you don't need to worry about blurring the background w/ the lens -- assuming you use a non-distracting background -- you'd want to go for the lens' sweet spot for best quality (and use a tripod to keep steady). On many digicams, that would be around f5-5.6. On (D)SLRs, it varies depending on the lens, but most lenses have sweet spot around f8-11. And these f-stops will generally provide fairly large DOF also, so they're good for landscapes too -- and you might want to do this for the night scenes and smooth waterfall shots also.

Of course, as Brett mentioned, DOF is also a function of focal length (and subject distance also), so you need to factor those things into what you do. Here's a pretty good DOF calculator (and also some helpful info on the subject):

http://dfleming.ameranet.com/dofjs.html

_Man_

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

A few new ones for y'all:

http://www.pbase.com/image/30484002.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/image/30484006.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/image/30484007.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/image/30484012.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/image/30510058.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/image/30484697.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/image/30484694.jpg

Let me know what you think (and not just the most obvious technical issues of course ).

Kind regards,

_Man_

 

[Mark Shannon]

Wow. Excellent. You never cease to amaze, Man-Fai.

Don't you get weird looks or questions from the people you photograph though? Or do you ask their permission first?

 

[FredHD]

I agree, Man-Fai's pics rock.

I was wondering if you all could thorw some criticique my way. I have just gotten back into photography after a long absence (and since the mainstream advent of digital) and would like to know what people think.

Here is my gallery

They are about 1/4 full resolution, but it's a free sight so hey.

 

[BobV]

Here's one I took a couple of days ago while watching the helicopters dumping water and retardant on the forest fire just behind my place.

http://meyeuniverse-com.virtualhelpe..._IMG_1121B.jpg

(full resolution of shot here)

I like this one as well

http://meyeuniverse-com.virtualhelpe...ooetfire10.jpg

(full res)

 

[Mark Shannon]

Jackson, I love your photography as well.

With the pictures of insects. How do you get so close to them?

 

[JohnRice]

Jackson, I'd say the best way you can improve your shots is to move the focal point away from the center. Basic rule of thirds stuff. Take This Shot for example. Try moving the flower toward the bottom right. It kind of leads to the left, so the bottom right would prabably be better than the bottom left.

Nice work. That's just the one thing I notice with the shots.

 

[FredHD]

A combination of patience, luck, and slow movement (especially butterflies). It tool me about 30 minutes to get the shots of the monarchs.

John,

Thanks for the feedback. I am starting to use the rule of thirds more, I had been so caught up in trying to "dial" myself in with my cameras with regards to lighting, DOF, etc. that I had somewhat neglected composure.

 

[JohnRice]

Yeah, you never want to lose your composure when you are composing.