Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
"Photo of the day" - June 2008
- Thread starter Doylem
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Great pic you've put together (and not too 'blatant'...).
To paraphrase Magritte: "This is not a lighthouse"...
Thanks
![]()
Someone told me that they were special globes that used a Tesla type florescent lighting source? Is that true?
I like the concept!
One suggestion, if you want to go for a more realistic look for the 'TV' image, try adding a noise layer using the same TV image mask.But is it a gummi? (4th picture down)To paraphrase Magritte: "This is not a lighthouse"...
My dinner from a few nights ago.
Pork Chops, home made waldorf salad (dressing from scratch), and garlic bread. So delicious.
gB
PS: Oh to you PeteB, looks like the kitty caught YOU!
Anubis, I quite like that
Today I, er, gave myself a tour of a now defunct industrial district..
Today I, er, gave myself a tour of a now defunct industrial district..
I got my new Nikon 50mm f/1.8 D AF and had to take pictures alllll day
Here is my dinner, sweet and sour chicken....
Nikon D50
Shutter : 1/2000th
Aperture : f/1.8
Focal Length : 50mm
ISO : 200
Here is my dinner, sweet and sour chicken....
Nikon D50
Shutter : 1/2000th
Aperture : f/1.8
Focal Length : 50mm
ISO : 200
Shutter: 6 sec. // Aperture: f/11 // Focal Length: 40 mm (cropped) // ISO 100
...fireworks show Friday night after the baseball game, Royals playing at home, defeated by the San Fran Giants - Kauffman Stadium, Kansas City Missouri.
Doylem that shot is truly excellent.. Although I think it would be a bit nicer with a bright blue sky instead of those heavy clouds..
Anyways here's another leaf photo.
Anyways here's another leaf photo.
Thanks. When I shoot for myself (rather than, say, tourism promotors), I really prefer to shoot with clouds in the sky. 50% cloud, 50% blue sky is fine; 70% and 30% OK too (except the photo opportunities will be fewer). but unclouded blue skies just don't work for me. The light is too blue, too bland and too 'scattered', like a bare bulb lighting up a room.
When the light is coming out of a part-cloudy sky, it seems more directional... giving better contrast, colour saturation... more like a floodlight than a bulb. OK, you can't control the floodlight, but, on a breezy day, you can watch it move across the landscape until it's lighting up what you're interested in.
Plenty of photographers seem to do better than me with those big blue skies. Unless it's near dawn or dusk, I find that landscapes get 'overlit'... which tends to diminish the 3D effect (ie; it's the quality of light that matters more, not the quantity).
Does this make any sense to the other landscape photographers out there?
Shutter: 1/125 // Aperture: f/9.0 // Focal Length: 340 mm (cropped) // ISO 1600
...Carlos Rosa #53 pitching for the Royals.
I agree - totally blue skies with no clouds, while great for going swimming, totally suck for daytime photography, in my opinion. If I'm shooting outside in the daytime, give me some puffy clouds. Otherwise I'll shoot at dusk or dawn - as long as we're talking about landscapes at least, be they rural or urban.
Also... no SolracSelbor for the past two weeks for some reason...
Does this make any sense to the other landscape photographers out there?
I love your landscapes Doylem, can't get enough.
And I agree with what you said. And on top of that, the empty blue skies are dull. Clouds also add a sense of motion I think.