Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Status
Not open for further replies.
tonyeck said:
Death in Vegas - 10/23/05 - Neon Graveyard - Las Vegas NV

I really like the difference in colors in that photo.

Here is one of mine taken on Curacoa @ the beach
Just_chillin_with_my_friends.jpg
 
Tanzania night sky

When was the last time you saw the Milky Way?

mufindi_starry(20D_20060621_1437).jpg


6-21-2006
Mufindi, Tanzania
Canon EOS 20D
ISO 1600
19mm
f/3.5
30sec (not 1/30sec!)

Shutter delay + a cheap & tiny 3" plastic tripod on flimsy table.


Image is currently full frame (uncropped). All of the illumination inside the cabin is from a single candle.

Adobe Photoshop CS2 RAW Converter settings:
Temperature 2850°F (Tungsten)
Exposure +1.50
Shadows 5
Brightness 100
Contrast 0
Saturation 0.

Unsharp Mask applied at: +50%, 2 pixel radius, 4 levels.


-hh
 
Great shot, -hh. But wouldn't that cloud be an atmospheric one, rather than a cosmic one? I dunno, I just find it hard to believe. Amazing, if it is, and beautiful, even if it isn't. :)

Here's my shot for today.

Make: Canon
Model: Canon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XT
Shutter Speed: 1/500 second
F Number: F/8.0
Focal Length: 255 mm
ISO Speed: 1600
Date Picture Taken: Jul 25, 2006, 6:42:21 PM

raspberries.jpg
 
-hh said:
When was the last time you saw the Milky Way?

6-21-2006
Mufindi, Tanzania
Canon EOS 20D
ISO 1600
19mm
f/3.5
30sec (not 1/30sec!)

Shutter delay + a cheap & tiny 3" plastic tripod on flimsy table.

Image is currently full frame (uncropped). All of the illumination inside the cabin is from a single candle.

Adobe Photoshop CS2 RAW Converter settings:
Temperature 2850°F (Tungsten)
Exposure +1.50
Shadows 5
Brightness 100
Contrast 0
Saturation 0.

Unsharp Mask applied at: +50%, 2 pixel radius, 4 levels.
-hh

Wow! I have got to get me some of those candles!

It almost looks like a HDR, impressive. You're definitely not in Kansas.
 
seenew said:
Great shot, -hh. But wouldn't that cloud be an atmospheric one, rather than a cosmic one? I dunno, I just find it hard to believe. Amazing, if it is, and beautiful, even if it isn't. :)
It certainly doesn't look atmospheric, but it's amazingly beautiful no matter what it is.
 
-hh said:
When was the last time you saw the Milky Way?

mufindi_starry(20D_20060621_1437).jpg


6-21-2006
Mufindi, Tanzania
Canon EOS 20D
ISO 1600
19mm
f/3.5
30sec (not 1/30sec!)

Shutter delay + a cheap & tiny 3" plastic tripod on flimsy table.


Image is currently full frame (uncropped). All of the illumination inside the cabin is from a single candle.

Adobe Photoshop CS2 RAW Converter settings:
Temperature 2850°F (Tungsten)
Exposure +1.50
Shadows 5
Brightness 100
Contrast 0
Saturation 0.

Unsharp Mask applied at: +50%, 2 pixel radius, 4 levels.


-hh

Wonderful picture. I've seen the Milky Way, but not with that detail. I guess it takes a longer exposure. My eyes won't do that! :D
 
(description from my DA gallery)
St. Louis, Missouri. 2006.

Yeah, so I was in St. Louis again this year in June, same reason as last time, two years ago. I also reattemped a panorama of the arch from underneath, this time with a better camera, more experience, and a LOT better sky/lighting conditions. I really like this one, the other one was more of an experiment.
Six pictures, stitched together in about 2.5 hours. I was using my sister's Powershot A65 she loaned me after my Coolpix died, and before I got my 350D. So yeah. Pretty decent little camera, actually. I'd recommend it.

larger version can be found here: http://seenew.net/art/panorificBG.jpg
panorific2.jpg

larger version can be found here: http://seenew.net/art/panorificBG.jpg
 
seenew said:
(description from my DA gallery)
St. Louis, Missouri. 2006.

Yeah, so I was in St. Louis again this year in June, same reason as last time, two years ago. I also reattemped a panorama of the arch from underneath, this time with a better camera, more experience, and a LOT better sky/lighting conditions. I really like this one, the other one was more of an experiment.
Six pictures, stitched together in about 2.5 hours. I was using my sister's Powershot A65 she loaned me after my Coolpix died, and before I got my 350D. So yeah. Pretty decent little camera, actually. I'd recommend it.

larger version can be found here: http://seenew.net/art/panorificBG.jpg

My fears of heights hit hard on this photo!

Great stuff and a nice journey as I scrolled down in my browser... without reading the description, I first thought it was a reflection in water of a tall building.
 
seenew said:
(description from my DA gallery)
St. Louis, Missouri. 2006.

Yeah, so I was in St. Louis again this year in June, same reason as last time, two years ago. I also reattemped a panorama of the arch from underneath, this time with a better camera, more experience, and a LOT better sky/lighting conditions. I really like this one, the other one was more of an experiment.
Six pictures, stitched together in about 2.5 hours. I was using my sister's Powershot A65 she loaned me after my Coolpix died, and before I got my 350D. So yeah. Pretty decent little camera, actually. I'd recommend it.

larger version can be found here: http://seenew.net/art/panorificBG.jpg

larger version can be found here: http://seenew.net/art/panorificBG.jpg

Man that is an awesome shot. I just spent 5 minutes scrolling back and forth, repeatedly being tripped out doing it.
Love it, thanks
 
-hh said:
...................................................................The human eye can adapt to six full orders of magnitude (roughly 0.1 lux to 100,000 lux), although I don't know how quickly it adapts "instantly" while we purview a scene. ..............................................................

-hh


is it really only six orders of magnitude? i thought it was much more.

anyway, your pic's are great. i'm looking forward to the sunset!
 
andiwm2003 said:
is it really only six orders of magnitude? i thought it was much more.

"Only" six?

Consider that a standard camera lens goes from f/22 to f/1.4, that's 8 stops, which is 256x, or just over 2 orders of magnitude.

It is a bit more than six orders - the textbooks say 9. However, this assumes 30 minutes of adaptation. When you close down the time scale, the ratio changes.

FWIW, I did check Wiki for human adaptation and for a "given moment of time", they say 1000x contrast ratio, which is 3 orders of magnitude.

EDIT:
"Comparing 1000x to 256x, that suggests that the eye is effectively 4x more sensitive than a camera to the contrast within a scene."

Oops! I think I'm comparing apples to oranges here, as f/stop doesn't have anything to do with contrast / dynamic range ratio's.


-hh
 
Back on track...

Baby hating the heat, Gilroy Garlic Festival, CA 7/24/2004


img1096copycq8.jpg




:edit: in honor of the Gilroy Garlic Festival that will be happening this weekend!
 
Got the sunset done before this weekend

Katavi National Park, Tanzania
28 June 2006
Canon EOS Elan IIe (35mm)
Fuji Velvia @ ISO 40
shutter, f/stop - not recorded
Approx 20mm focal length
Digital Scan



Now here's the fun part: click on the above.

When I first scanned the slide, I accidentally had the image type set incorrectly. Instead of 48-bit color, it was something called "color smoothing". The linked file is what it produced. Quite...er, "Funky".


-hh
 
Riding the Rail Runner

I went with my family and rode the new Rail Runner commuter train in NM earlier this week. I snapped this picture of my nephew along the ride.



Camera: Nikon D50
Shutter Speed: 1/100
Aperture: f 5.0
Focal Length: 32mm
ISO: 400
 
Jonathon Swam, Employee.

Camera: Canon EOS 350D
Shutter Speed: 1"
Aperture: f/4
Focal Length: 10mm
ISO: 100
 

Attachments

  • IMG_7813.jpg
    IMG_7813.jpg
    116.9 KB · Views: 86
Status
Not open for further replies.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.