Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: mwsilvers
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 1066 next>>
Apr 15, 2024 18:38:05   #
goofybruce wrote:
Millbrook is in the Delaware Water Gap national park and full of great shots. In the summer months, several of the buildings are open with volunteers in costumes on several occasions. A great place to get "lost in time" for an hour or two taking pictures. As an aside, one of the entry roads to Millbrook (Old Mine Road) will be closing down for much of the spring and summer soon for repairs. OMR is supposedly the oldest commercial road in the U.S. and was used by the colonial Dutch to cart ore from some of the mines up to Poughkeepsie.
Millbrook is in the Delaware Water Gap national pa... (show quote)


"As an aside, one of the entry roads to Millbrook (Old Mine Road) will be closing down for much of the spring and summer soon for repairs."

Sections of Old Mine Road are in pretty poor condition which requires careful driving at slow speeds. It is not a particularly dangerous drive, but there is too great a chance for accidents to occur.
Go to
Apr 15, 2024 15:32:57   #
jhtall wrote:
I am not a Nikon user, but if I had your problem I would contact Nikon directly with the problem.


I know you were trying to help. However, it was pretty clear from the outset that bracketing was the likely cause of the issue. This would have been fairly obvious to anyone familiar with bracketing, even non-Nikon shooters. There would have been no reason to contact Nikon until bracketing was ruled out. Consider this the next time you decide to suggest contacting the manufacturer for equipment or feature issues with which you have no personal experience.
Go to
Apr 15, 2024 11:49:46   #
Rick from NY wrote:
Folks - I raised this subject a few years back and thought I’d give it an encore. UHH has 2 sections for members to post pics - Photo Gallery and Photo Analysis and posting constructive criticism in the first is frowned upon. I think this rule does a disservice to photographers looking to up their game.

I often look at posts in the Gallery and too often see, sorry for the blunt language, just awful photos. I’m not talking about subjective matters. I’m talking about pics that are out of focus, poorly exposed, with wildly tilted horizons (not done intentionally for artistic purposes), badly post processed or overprocessed, poorly composed with telephone poles growing out of heads, etc. or any number of other technical (NOT subjective) flaws.

And most times, well meaning members post, “Great set”, or “Nicely done” or other “ attaboys” in an attempt to not hurt another member’s feelings. I see this as counterproductive and reinforcing bad technique by poster. I ask how is a member to develop better photography skills if, I again apologize upfront, technically terrible pics are displayed and followed by lots of gushing platitudes?

Last time I mentioned this, I was slapped down by numerous members who argue that unless a poster requests constructive criticism, nothing negative should be said. Ok - I’ll buy the “If you have nothing nice to say, say nothing” idea, but gushing over bad stuff does harm to the poster too. If the pics are bad, say nothing. Stop reinforcing bad work.

Just a suggestion to those posting to the Gallery in the future - think about soliciting criticisms so you can improve your work. Sure you will get many nasty, snarky and often incorrect replies from a certain subsection of members, but you will also get many great suggestions for improvement offered in a polite, constructive manner. I’ve been a photographer for 55 yrs and I welcome all well meaning and civil critiques. We are never too old to learn a new trick.

Anxious to see the replies to this rant.
Folks - I raised this subject a few years back and... (show quote)


After being active on this site for many years, it has been my experience that posters who give gushing approval to poorly crafted images, are most often not just being nice, but rather don't understand the techniques of photography and composition any better themselves, and their own work is often just as problematic as the images that they are praising.

This site has a very large number of members. Their photographic and composition skills range from the sublime to the mediocre or worse.. Many on this site are not particularly skilled or may lack a good eye for the components that make for a pleasing photograph. However, they may be content with what they're currently producing and may completely ignore flaws that many of us see as obvious and significant. They may also not be interested in reading the negative observations of their images by others.

Keep in mind that all are welcome here regardless of their skill level. If members just want to show off their work and are not interested in a critique, that is their prerogative. It is probably best you just ignore any unbridled praise for images you see as poorly crafted and reserve your own critiques on this site to locations where they are appropriate.
Go to
Apr 15, 2024 00:57:38   #
Thanks to all. Wendy was really pleased with the comments. It was the first time I have posted one of her images here. Although the Nikon Z50 body is at the bottom of the Z line and the Nikkor Z 16-50mm kit lens is the most inexpensive zoom in Nikon's Z line, the combination is still capable of producing sharp and pleasing images across frame with excellent contrast and lots of detail. The only edits to the original raw file in PhotoLab 7 was the conversion to black & white, the addition of a small amount of fine contrast and the export to jpeg.
Go to
Apr 14, 2024 03:05:48   #
Here is one captured by my wife, Wendy, using her Nikon Z50 and Nikkor Z 16-50mm lens during Autumn 2022. It was recently converted to B&W in PhotoLab 7.


(Download)
Go to
Apr 13, 2024 14:10:55   #
BebuLamar wrote:
What do you mean by "composure"? You mean it's better being calm than cropping? I don't understand.


I think he means understanding composition.
Go to
Apr 10, 2024 11:07:37   #
PhilS wrote:
I am wondering if anyone can explain what happened with my photos of the 2024 eclipse. Here's the setup.

I was near the center of the path of totality. There were a few high, very thin clouds, but the view was pretty much clear and unobstructed for the entire time.

These pictures were taken with a Nikon D5500 with Nikon 18-55mm zoon, set to 55mm.
Focus set to infinity.
Solar filter was installed.
Exposure was manual (I think F8, 1/30 sec, ISO 800).
Pix taken every 1 minute via remote shutter release.

I also had a Nikon D5100 with a Sigma 600mm reflector lens. Same exposure settings. Solar filter installed. Pix taken every 1 minute using an intervalometer.

The D5100/600mm took decent (although overexposed!) photos. You can plainly see the eclipse progression from beginning to end of the partial.

The D5500 only took pictures of a round image - no eclipse change noted, other than position. Just a round dot.
I know that the setup should have worked because I could see a difference when I moved my hand in front of the lens (using LiveView).

I've also checked the D5500 since then to see if there was any kind of damage to the sensor - everything looks fine.

I would like to understand what happened to cause every image to be the same dot.
I am wondering if anyone can explain what happened... (show quote)

I did not use my camera doing the eclipse, but I believe you are supposed to take the solar filter off during totality. I guess the very dark filter prevented you from seeing the corona.
Go to
Apr 7, 2024 02:22:19   #
CliffMcKenzie wrote:
Bill, I think you have what you need a full frame camera with a 2.8 zoom (24-105). I would not buy a 2.0 extender, but I do like my 1.4 better (may use it for the eclipse, but not the 2.0). In street photography, I shoot 24-120 and I am very happy. At the end of any year, my 24-70 2.8 is always the winner. Hope this helps,
Cliff


The Canon 24-105mm is an F/4 lens not an F/2.8.
Go to
Apr 5, 2024 18:27:46   #
Carl1024 wrote:
Looking 4 a good used 1 as mine went out?


What happened to it? If the shutter box failed it might be a better option to have it replaced. Perhaps you should check out the repair costs before buying a replacement. If you are still committed to this body, getting it fixed AND buying an inexpensive used one will give you a backup which may meet your longer term needs. The 7D2 design will be 10 years old in November 2024 and Canon may cease to provide parts and service for them after that time if they haven't already. I sold mine early in 2022.
Go to
Mar 31, 2024 22:28:59   #
User ID wrote:
If you can switch it down to 1920x1080 like your old monitor, the text should get bigger.


Or you can can keep the resolution and just increase the size of the text globally or for a specific application.

Global text size adjustment

(Download)

Global text size adjustment

(Download)

Application specific DPI adjustments

(Download)
Go to
Mar 25, 2024 03:49:38   #
niteman3d wrote:
I hope it's true... just read a rumor that a 28-400 Nikon Z mount lens is in the pipeline. I really miss my Tamron 28-400 which doesn't work with the FTZ.


I assume you meant the Tamron 18-400 since there is no Tamron 28-400 lens. Since Tamron now makes a few Nikon branded lenses under license for the Z mount, I think it may be a safe assumption that a new Z mount Nikon branded 28-400mm will likely be manufactured by Tamron for Nikon. I certainly hope it will be a better lens than the Tamron 18-400mm. As a superzoom lens it was one of the best available but as with all wide focal range superzooms it still had a number of serious flaws. I got rid of mine after around a year of use with no regrets.
Go to
Mar 23, 2024 16:52:01   #
niteman3d wrote:
For the Nikon owners who may be interested, they're having a four-day Refurbished sale from today through Monday. I snagged a deal on the lens I wanted not long ago from Amazon, a 24-200 for $720. Lo and behold, Nikon has the refurb for $635 including tax. Sometimes it pays to wait. 😣


The Nikkor Z 24-200mm lens regularly sells for $796 new from authorized USA dealers.

Was the lens you purchased from Amazon from an authorized USA Nikon dealer? If not, and you require service for it, the cost to you may be much higher then just the difference in the cost you mentioned. First, if the lens you purchased was not from an authorized Nikon dealer the Nikon USA warranty is void. Second, if you require any service for that lens, under warranty or not, Nikon USA will not service it even if you are wiling to pay for that service. Buying Nikon gear in the USA from non-authorized sellers can be a very problematic choice
Go to
Mar 22, 2024 14:37:32   #
BebuLamar wrote:
Do you have an FX Z body? If yes then keep the lens to use for it and use it on the Zfc too. That way it's not wasted in any way. If you don't have an FX Z body then why did you get the FX lens for?


Nikon sells the Z fc with the retro version of their FX 28mm Z f/2.8 prime lens as a kit. They also marketed the retro version of their FX 40mm Z f/2 prime lens for it as well long before the full frame Zf body was introduced. I use both lenses on my Z fc. Clearly Nikon has no issue with using FX lenses on the Z fc and neither do i. Historically the best quality lens from Nikon and Canon were designed as full frame lenses. There is also a much greater variety of native full frame FX lenses available than DX lenses for the Nikon Z mount. If the 24-200mm focal range, with a 35mm equivalent angle of view of 36-300mm on the Z fc, works for the OP he should go for it.
Go to
Mar 19, 2024 09:49:16   #
SuperflyTNT wrote:
I noticed that too. I had no idea that mirrorless aren’t “regular” cameras.




If mirrorless bodies are not "regular" cameras I would also guess that capturing images on the LCD screens of DSLRs makes them not "regular" cameras either since doing that bypasses the mirror. More importantly, are DSLRs "regular" cameras at all since they don't use film? It seems like the definition of a "regular" camera is just the camera type preferred by the person using the term. I believe this mirrorless controversy in the end mostly comes down to a personal preference for using an OVF or an EVF and most other criticisms of mirrorless just confuse that issue. One day in the not too distance future, as EVF technology continues to improve, we may reach a point where we will look back and laugh at the silliness of this whole discussion.
Go to
Mar 19, 2024 08:48:12   #
maxlieberman wrote:
This store has been around as long as I can remember. It was well established in the mid-1970s, which is as far back as I go, photographically.

You are likely confusing it with the original 47th Street Photo which in its day was a very good store.
Go to
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 1066 next>>
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.