Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: WJShaheen
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 19 next>>
Jun 1, 2021 06:24:07   #
Great examples above, thank you. You can also easily have the advantages of RAW without post processing by opening the manufacturer's free software (NX Studio, View-NX-I/Canon DPP4) and export or output to TIFF, or whichever is your preferred format. The photo will be rendered using your in-camera picture control settings. So, in the end, you don't lose THAT capability (to control your exposure options) and you retain the simplicity, as well as the ability to further do SOME enhancements. There is no need for one versus the other. JPEG is simply a step-down from the original captured data and is only useful to email/post to sites that impose limitations on size and format.
Go to
May 24, 2021 06:10:59   #
billnikon wrote:
Please reread post before being snarky, she said $350.ish ?.
Do you know what "?" means. I believe she is open to higher or lower prices if it fits with what she is looking for.
Do you know what "ish" means, I believe she again is open to alternatives.
And lastly, I was only being helpful trying to point her in the right direction. You have become very mean lately.
Have a great day, I will.


Yes.
Go to
May 9, 2021 18:34:47   #
I agree. My bag easily accommodates a 10-20mm, a 35mm prime and an 18-200mm.
Go to
May 8, 2021 08:44:10   #
I have the AF-S DX Nkr 18-200mm F/3.5-5.6G ED VR II and it is very sharp, versatile and available now at a great price.
Go to
Apr 22, 2021 15:06:15   #
Ballard wrote:
Hi Bill in Gold Canyon
Thanks for checking out the image and for the comment. Note: I worded the sentence poorly. I should have said
"I used the same Dark and Bias frames and separate flats frames for processing the individual subs for each filter set".
Note: I also used the best sub from the set of luminance images as the reference image for stacking each set of subs for each filter. This made it a lot easier particularly since I had a meridian flip after the red exposures which had the M51 off by ~ 1 arc minute for the green and blue exposures (as well as 180 degree flip).
Hi Bill in Gold Canyon br Thanks for checking out ... (show quote)


Great!
Go to
Apr 22, 2021 06:35:48   #
Excellent detail. Well done.

Question - Re: "I also used Dark frames, Bias frames and Flat frames for each filter.". I understand why you would need Flats for each filter. But why Darks and Bias frames, since the scope is covered or the shutter closed?

Also, since all of your exposures are the same (5 min.) you really don't need separate bias frames. The Bias signal is included in the Dark frame. Bias frames are needed when you have different exposure times and need to scale your Dark frames.

Just trying to save you some time and effort.

Again, beautiful.

Bill in Gold Canyon, AZ
Go to
Mar 6, 2021 07:45:19   #
sodapop wrote:
I use Davinci Resolve 16. Does everything and free. Tank some learning but many many tutorials for it


I've downloaded version 17 (now available) and will take it for a spin.
Thanks for you recommendation.

Bill
Go to
Feb 28, 2021 07:16:26   #
R.G. wrote:
Or you can set Windows Photo Viewer as the default opener for each of the file types. If you get a Windows Photo Viewer codec pack you will be able to open most types of files (including raw files).


Go to
Feb 3, 2021 11:53:01   #
TRSquared wrote:
The term apochromatic is applied to an optic that brings 3 different wavelengths of light (colors) to the same focus as opposed to only 2 wavelengths for achromatic optics. With this design approach, the focus vs. wavelength plot can bed made nearly flat across the visible range of colors, thereby reducing chromatic aberration to a minimum. This result is something that is not possible with an achromatic design.


Give this man a cigar. In astronomy, an APO is an apochromatic telescope.
Go to
Jan 13, 2021 21:24:33   #
Maybe we should stop calling it "crop" factor and use instead the term "zoom" factor, if anything at all.
Go to
Jan 13, 2021 16:16:56   #
bleirer wrote:
This is my first double report. Why not make your case in a civil way without calling names? Why not use facts and persuasion and clear explanations to rebut something you disagree with?


Go to
Jan 13, 2021 11:56:44   #
Abo wrote:
John7199,

User ID is a great source of information, but John you must know
how to interpret his posts.

Fortunately that's very simple, all you have to do to interpret
what he writes, is know the exact opposite
of what he says is true... In a nut shell, he's less than a talentless
hack with the IQ of a fence post.

On the other hand, CHG Canon knows cameras very well,
and his explanations of "Crop Factor" are spot on."
And Thomas902 is a fine artist... a Photographer with a capitol "P" imho; his comments
are spot on too. It's worth digesting what they both say.

The diagram below represents an FX and a DX sensor and their physical dimensions.

The part of the view you see in their respective frames is approximately what each sensor
will capture with the same lens swapped from an FX camera to a DX camera.

Ironically, I shot the image with a cell phone lol.
John7199, br br User ID is a great source of info... (show quote)


Great illustration. Says it all.
Go to
Jan 13, 2021 07:30:02   #
We keep using the term "equivalent". But what may be going unsaid is, equivalent to what? (Sure, the math proves it but may not get the point across very well.)

The short answer is, equivalent to a 35mm frame. But, what's the point to comparing to something from the past?

Another perspective that helped me understand "crop factor" (and promptly forget about it) is to simply imagine an image on a sensor being projected onto either a screen of printed piece of paper of a given size. The smaller sensor's image must be stretched, or expanded to fill the final field of view, in effect zooming into the subject area. And, in the end, sacrificing some amount of resolution. But, again, when compared to a 35mm frame.

So, I am quite content with my DX format Nikon D7500. If I want more FOV, I just use a shorter lens.
Go to
Jan 2, 2021 05:51:40   #
loubart wrote:
Anybody use Luminar for photo editing. Is it worth the investment.


I think you would be best served by taking advantage of the trial period to see what you think and how well it works for you. There are many different opinions regarding LuminarAI but you be the judge.

I happen to like it.
Go to
Dec 23, 2020 14:52:55   #
montephoto wrote:
As soon as you click the shutter, your image is copyrighted - even if you do not register it. However, registering it will help you if you decide to pursue copyright infringement. (It can be registered after the fact.)

I know of another pro photographer who had an image accepted into the PPA Loan Collection. He found another photographer, in another state, used that image on his own web site to advertise his "skills". That takes some nerve (and stupidity) since a 3rd photographer noticed it right away (memorable photograph) and told the true owner of the image. Very easily proven who owned the image. Google Image search can help anybody find their images on the web. PPA has been fighting for, and lobbying for this copyright legislation for years. If you don't feel it helps you - fine. There are many who will benefit from this bill, if it does get passed with the amended bill.
As soon as you click the shutter, your image is co... (show quote)


"As soon as you click the shutter, your image is copyrighted". And, maybe that's why it's called a copyright NOTICE.
Go to
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 19 next>>
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.