Posts for: lorim222315
Sep 1, 2016 16:33:16 #
I decided it was time to try something new with these quick little things. They have taken comfort with the bee balm. They sit there for a long time and among other flowers in the garden. But today there has been activity like no other day. Best count is 6. They are protective, defensive, quick and territorial. Images on the flowers has become easy, they pose. Stopping wings can happen sometimes. The tongue is a lot of fun to capture. But getting more than one in focus is a challenge. I think I did okay.
Aug 22, 2016 21:30:01 #
Linda thank you. If I could figure out multiple adds, I would share a great morning of total addiction.
Aug 22, 2016 21:01:35 #
It was a very windy day with bees at the feeders. A safe place to land.
Aug 20, 2016 17:40:09 #
Thanks for looking - it is a hummingbird. it was a stinker but then decided to just sit on the top of the flowers and pose until there was this itch that caused him some irritation.
Caldian wrote:
Ok. What is "it"?
Aug 20, 2016 17:38:15 #
Thanks Doddy. I have been waiting all summer to catch them on the bee balm. I almost cut that stuff down last week. Glad I waited.
Doddy wrote:
Excellent shot Lorim.
Aug 20, 2016 17:37:14 #
Thanks for looking. I appreciate it.
Blues wrote:
That is a great catch lorim.
Mike
Mike
Aug 20, 2016 10:14:30 #
I have played hide and seek all summer. Finally I got it!!
Aug 5, 2016 17:43:33 #
Thank you. Thanks for looking!!
Azboy wrote:
Wow! I would take those colors anytime, beautiful! 
Aug 5, 2016 09:39:41 #
Camera bag has lots of gear, including DEET. But the piece of equipment that saved the night was the golf towel for waving and swatting. Good heavens. And things got much better once the heavy dew started. However that challenged a dry lens. And I thought focus would be the big issue!!!!
CanonShot wrote:
Keep in mind that Alaskan bugs have a Double F rating: Fast & Furious! Did I mention UNRELENTING... hmmmm!
Aug 5, 2016 09:37:12 #
Always RAW. Why do it if it is not RAW!!! Thank you. Only my third attempt and the lights were breathtaking. I got to the spot early (right before sunset) and got set up. Knowing that it is a probability you won't see colors and just trusting the camera to do it's thing takes a little practice. And if you don't see colors, replicating them in post is tricky. Stay away from neon and I guess you are good to go.
big-guy wrote:
What you've got looks pretty darn fine. If shooting in raw then it won't make any difference except for what the camera shows you on the lcd screen, which is just a thumbnail built into the raw, showing what the camera thinks the processed shot would look like. Once in PP, you can set it to what ever looks best or change it on the fly for different effects. If shooting jpg you severely limit what your final product will be as only minor changes can be done after the fact.
Aug 5, 2016 09:21:46 #
Thank you for the link. A very good read. Now if we could just figure a way to get bugs to leave us alone. The big debate - cold or bugs?!!!
CanonShot wrote:
Here's my suggestion:
Go to this link and work your way down through the chapters... an easy read, quite compelling, and these folks know what they are talking about.
http://www.alaskaphotographics.com/blog/how-to-photograph-the-northern-lights-with-a-digital-camera/
Go to this link and work your way down through the chapters... an easy read, quite compelling, and these folks know what they are talking about.
http://www.alaskaphotographics.com/blog/how-to-photograph-the-northern-lights-with-a-digital-camera/
Aug 5, 2016 09:03:42 #
Thanks for your response. I was in the range of 5500K. Trying to find my niche with processing. Some images I have seen are very, very processed.
wdross wrote:
The astrophotography section will have the correct info for sure. I believe one needs to shoot at the daylight setting (~5500K?) and shoot raw for ease in post processing. The actual specific wave lengths for the colors can be determined since it deals with the excitement of mostly oxygen, hydrogen, and nitrogen molecules. I'm fairly certain that an internet search give you those wave lengths and the relative ratios for the various energy levels for the solar storms.
Aug 5, 2016 09:01:27 #
Thank you! I also agree to try and replicate what you see. We didn't actually see green but the camera sure did.
Aug 4, 2016 14:44:11 #
I posted in long exposure. Not sure where is correct.
When shooting northern lights - what setting for color is most correct. It was suggested that I should shoot in Kelvin 3000-3200. Northern lights are cooler than we see them and cooler than the camera sees them.
When shooting northern lights - what setting for color is most correct. It was suggested that I should shoot in Kelvin 3000-3200. Northern lights are cooler than we see them and cooler than the camera sees them.
Aug 4, 2016 12:13:19 #
I was able to go to northern MN Tuesday night for the possible show of northern lights. While it took a while to get started, the wait paid off.
I have had some coaching on how to control the color. Of course post processing is always one way. It was suggested that northern lights should be shot using Kelvin 3000-3200. That most northern lights are cooler than what we actually see. I used a 30" exposure and lowered my ISO and used auto white balance. Is Kelvin a good shooting option for night photography?
I would ask your opinion on where the color setting should be set.
I have had some coaching on how to control the color. Of course post processing is always one way. It was suggested that northern lights should be shot using Kelvin 3000-3200. That most northern lights are cooler than what we actually see. I used a 30" exposure and lowered my ISO and used auto white balance. Is Kelvin a good shooting option for night photography?
I would ask your opinion on where the color setting should be set.
