simplesimon wrote:
Thanks Linda for your kind comment
I was concerned about the amount of water in the foreground, but the there is the 'problem' of where one places to shore line
I think you need the water there to balance the sky. I personally wouldn't crop this much at all...
peteofmarin wrote:
so I noticed the moon is traveling, however, i mistakenly thought the moon was in geosynchronous orbit, but that's a different forum. thanks for the setting updates
pete
The moon basically rises 1 hour later every day. That's how you can see it at different times of day/night. It is visible at some time every day, providing the weather is cooperating. If you see it at a good spot - rising above the trees, for example - it will be in the same place the following day, 1 hour later. It will have changed its phase slightly, of course.
It's best to avoid full moon, because the light is too direct, and there is a lot less contrast. If you can see the terminator (not Arnie, the day/night line), then pictures show up the details on the craters and mountains best along that line.
Nikon_Bill wrote:
It's raining last night and today, but soon I'll be stalking her. Thanks for the tip.
With the discovery of what happens to the background of moon shots when I kick up the contrast, exposure, and other adjustments, I am going back and doing it to older shots of space I made, and seeing things that only were black in the photos. It only seems to work in the NEF or raw files due to the latitude or range of info that is captured. If you shoot, be sure to to it in raw too.
I now plan to explore other areas to see if I can show any nebula, and to shoot the northern areas.
It's raining last night and today, but soon I'll b... (
show quote)
Nebulae would be neat - they are pretty big in area on the sky. Problem is, they are very faint, mostly. You would need to have a guided camera, or possibly take a bunch of photos and use software to 'stack' them together. Two that are probably worth trying are M42 the "great nebula", which hangs underneath Orion's belt (Orion is a winter constellation and dominates the view towards the south on winter evenings) and M31, the Andromeda galaxy. That is also visible with binoculars - or the naked eye, if your sight is good enough.
I have directions to find M31, which I find much easier than most of the books and magazines give. If you are interested drop me a PM and I will try and explain them. I don't want to bore the general populace too much!
Now that I think on it, I think I will be tackling these 2 myself this year, once I get a decent tripod.
I should warn you that the Orion nebula looks great and colourful in 'professional' photographs, but you won't see any colour without a very long exposure. It is very low saturation, to put it into more photographic terms. That is the case with most nebulae, unfortunately. The magazines are constantly printing letters from people who can't get their photos to look like those taken at big observatories.
Good luck, and please post any successes you have with them!
Nikon_Bill wrote:
I went out last night to shoot the moon and compare lenses. After the moon shot I noticed a planet to the east of the moon at about 15deg. east of it. The result on my computer was what looked like one pixel of light and the whole screen was black. When I pushed the exposure up, and the contrast, the stars began to show up, and some color clusters. Jupiter was clear and round. I was shocked at how much I was able to see from a Nikon 70-300mm VR lens when I pushed the image in Photoshop CC. Now I'm stalking Saturn.
I went out last night to shoot the moon and compar... (
show quote)
Great shot! I haven't tried my sx50 on Jupiter just yet; I think I need to get a tripod first. The IS is good, but...
Based on my experience with a telescope, you should be able to get good shots of Saturn. The disk will be quite a bit smaller than Jupiter, but the rings... The rings... Please post some if you get it. Astronomy magazine, or their website, give good information each month on where the planets are located, and what time of night you need to be watching for best effect.
Jimande wrote:
Believe I used a tripod, can't remember. Shot from my front porch around 4:30 PM (CST), camera still set on DST. Data on download. Comments/critique welcome.
Very nice... How did you fill the frame in the second one? I only tried once so far, and my efforts were similar to your first photo. I haven't tried cropping in closer on them just yet. I will be trying more, once I get a decent view of it.
dfrost01 wrote:
The new offer doesn't require that you have any version of PS at all.
Yeah, and this is after I spent good money to buy CS3 on ebay, and jumped through all the adobe hoops to get the registration switched to my name...
I guess the upside is that I will have CS3 ready to go if adobe put the price up too much next year!
schuchmn wrote:
No longer true. Adobe announced the $10/month deal even for those who don't have any version of Photoshop. Deal is only good until December 2.
So, instead of being clever, I just wasted my time and money in getting CS3... Typical!
Lee Thomas wrote:
Continuing my experimentation with the SX50 and off-camera flash, if any of you have Paul C. Buff's CyberSync transmitters and receivers, I have tested using the transmitter in the SX50 hotshot to trigger a Nikon SB800 flash that is connected to a CyberSync receiver. The connection works in all modes however you must set the output power of your flash manually. I have attached a photo taken on my iPad to show the two devices.
What I did find interesting is that the flash will still trigger even up to the SX50's max shutter speed of 1/2000. No cutoff shows in the image taken. The LCD data shows the set flash value but I have not yet determined if the shutter max's out at a lower sync speed no matter how high the shutter speed selected. More to follow here.
Continuing my experimentation with the SX50 and of... (
show quote)
Thanks for the info. I haven't messed with flash yet on my sx50, but who knows? One of these days...
Rongnongno wrote:
Photoshop CC maybe a solution as you subscribe to it on a monthly basis, sign up for a year and if the child gets hooked, keep using it as a 'Christmas' present!!!
So says the UHH Grinch relative.
The $10 per month deal only applies if you own a version of Photoshop CS3 or later. Not sure what it costs without that. I took the side road, and bought CS3 on ebay, then subscribed to CC this morning. Programs are downloading as we speak. er, type...
mwsilvers wrote:
Its a completely different camera with a different body and is better than the T3 in many ways. This does not mean that the T3 won't meet your needs. Its a nice camera at the price point, but the T3i is just better.Keep in mind that the T3i is not the most recent Rebel model. It was superseded by the t4i and the current t5i, but is still in the lineup for the time being.
Don't know if it means anything, but the T3i is the best-selling dslr on Amazon over the past month. Followed, believe it or not, by the 5D mk III! Talk about chalk and cheese! The T3 makes their top 10, but is quite a way down the list.
Tree1942 wrote:
Does anyone know of a good place to send a point and shoot canon camera for repair?
I sent a Canon powershot 1300 IS to Canon when the lens stopped coming out. They did a great fix, but I can't remember what they charged me for it. Can't have been too much, or I wouldn't have bothered.
pnwheeler wrote:
I made this photograph last weekend. Color added nothing to the rustic autumn mountain scene under overcast sky so I desaturated the image, otherwise post processing was minimal.
I love the texture on that wall! I was a B&W film shooter for many years, and I am now starting to get back to the grey stuff... Still learning how to make them 'pop' like this does!
birdpix wrote:
Spent a chilly day at Conowingo Dam on the Susquehanna River in Maryland. There were probably no more than 30 Eagles there and the action was very sporadic. I did manage to get a few good shots.
Very nice! Maybe I will get a chance to check that place out, it's not *too* far from me... Need to get better at following the action first, though!
Bob Yankle wrote:
Thanks a ton for the camera settings. I keep wondering how you folks get such tack-sharp captures, and know I now. I suspect the other skill one has to develop is the manually track that bird across the sky, and that's a timing skill in its own right.
And *THAT* is the bit which is hard...
This is a nice shot!