Picture of the Day (November 2007)

[arn]

Continuation of the previous Picture of the Day

iGary wrote:

Thought it would be fun to share one of your best every day - doesn't matter what it is, just as long as it is decent (no nudes or overly graphic shots). You can add a picture everyday as long as it is different.

It does not matter when the picture was taken, as long as you only post ONE SINGLE IMAGE per day. Make sure to post a date, location and description.

Please use this format when posting:

Blue Angels Flight Demonstration, U.S. Naval Academy/Severn River 5/24/06

And if you like, post your EXIF data, so others may learn if they want to - but please use the following format (optional). If you do not know what you have or only have a couple of bits, post those, but in the order listed below, leaving out the titles of what you do not have, please.

Camera: Canon EOS 20D
ISO: 400
Focal Length: 220mm
Shutter/Aperture: 1/1000 @ f11
Lens: EF 100-400L f4.5-5.6 IS USM

 

[epicwelshman]

Just out of curiosity... why the continuation? Was the original thread getting too large?

 

[baby duck monge]

Not going to question the continuation. Not even a great picture. I just wanted to be first. This is from when some Buddhist monks came by the University to create some art for us. Really bad light, and no tripod, but here it is.

 

[M@lew]

Yeah the original one was pretty big. I was wondering if it was going to get remade.

 

[Abstract]

Despite the fact that large threads are split up into multiple pages, it actually takes up more "resources" (don't know the technical words to describe it) for you to go into a single page of the Picture of the Day, with only 20 posts in it, than it is for me to go into another thread with only 20 total posts in it.

So basically, the amount of resources used is dependent on the size of the thread itself, and not just the number of posts in the particular page you want to look at.

This happened once before on a board I used to go to many years ago, and that was the explanation we were given back then.

 

[Martin C]

Unwashed Feet
September 23rd, 2007
New York City

Nikon D40
1/80 sec at ƒ/3.5
18mm
ISO 200​

I used a wide aperture and the built in flash to isolate the feet from the rest of the body. In post processing, I desaturated a bit and did some burning and dodging as well.

 

[J'aime]

Red Wolf, Chattanooga Nature Center

 

[walangij]

Camera: Canon EOS 350D
ISO: 100
Focal Length: 135mm
Shutter/Aperture: 1/4000 @ f2.0
Lens: EF 135mm f/2.0L​

 

[seenew]

Polaroid emulsion transfer. 2007.
3.25 x 4.25"

 

[arn]

So basically, the amount of resources used is dependent on the size of the thread itself, and not just the number of posts in the particular page you want to look at.

Yep. basically. When the server loads a page of a thread with 8000 replies, it has to sort through all of those.

Announcement here: https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/381541/

arn

 

[jlcharles]

St. Peter's Square in Vatican City from right in front of the basilica.

Hasselblad w/50mm probably around f/8 or so, hyperfocused.

Shot on Kodak Portra 160VC.

Flickr link for larger

 

[BigJohno]

Ok lame question but how do you add those boarders to your photos. I cant seem to figure it out in PS. Sorry to interrupt the thread. My connection is **** at work or els I would have put a picture up.

 

[jlcharles]

Ok lame question but how do you add those boarders to your photos. I cant seem to figure it out in PS. Sorry to interrupt the thread. My connection is **** at work or els I would have put a picture up.

I made an action that basically adds 60 pixels of white to the canvas size. Then 5 pixels of black. It's under Image->Canvas Size

 

[pdxflint]

environmental portrait

From the archives of old b/w 35mm workprints.

Canon EOS A2
Canon 28-105 f/3.5-4.5 USM
scanned from workprint

 

[BigJohno]

I made an action that basically adds 60 pixels of white to the canvas size. Then 5 pixels of black. It's under Image->Canvas Size

Hey thanks!

 

[BigJohno]

Here is mine.

 

[seenew]

From the archives of old b/w 35mm workprints.
<snip image>

Canon EOS A2
Canon 28-105 f/3.5-4.5 USM
scanned from workprint

perfect exposure! Man, look at that tonal range. Digital has a long way to go.

 

[shieldyoureyes]

Wow, Seenew. Those are simply amazing. I just love the 'feeling' they have. The tones, the great, in your face grain (is it even still grain?) Anyways, they certainly have a magic quality to them.

 

[shieldyoureyes]

Unwashed Feet
September 23rd, 2007
New York City

Nikon D40
1/80 sec at ƒ/3.5
18mm
ISO 200​

I used a wide aperture and the built in flash to isolate the feet from the rest of the body. In post processing, I desaturated a bit and did some burning and dodging as well.

I love it.

From the archives of old b/w 35mm workprints.

<snip image>

Canon EOS A2
Canon 28-105 f/3.5-4.5 USM
scanned from workprint

Wow. Great photograph. What film was this?

I'm with Seenew, digital has a long way to go before it even starts to catch up to film...thats why I almost always grab my Nikon F3 and some Tri-x over my D80.

 

[shieldyoureyes]

Kinetic

Stockholm, Sweden

Camera: Nikon F3
Lens: Nikkor 35mm f/2
Film: Ilford XP2

 

[anti-microsoft]

Here is mine.

Hey thats quite nice...keep up the good work!

 

[Edge100]

Yeah the original one was pretty big. I was wondering if it was going to get remade.

<snip image>

Wow, I love this. Something about her legs against the background.

 

[devilot]

Mod note: We are going to try something a little different and have a "Picture of the Day" thread each month, rather than a behemoth thread. So this one will be for November 2007 (and I'll edit the thread title as such).

Thanks!

 

[miranda.danny]

Out of His League

Funny...

Camera: Canon EOS XTi
Lens: Canon 50mm f1.8 II
ISO: 1600
Exposure: 1/60 @ f/1.8

 

[bld44]

Camera: Nikon D40
Lens: Nikon 18-200mm VRII @ 55mm
ISO: 1600
Exposure: 1/160 @ f/6.1