Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: abc1234
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 329 next>>
Mar 28, 2024 10:00:12   #
Interesting and I would like to try it. How about comparing it to the simple high pass sharpening? Like the animation. A picture is worth a thousand words.
Go to
Mar 10, 2024 12:29:40   #
Where is this?
Go to
Mar 9, 2024 14:50:02   #
I really like number 3 because of the insect and droplets add interest. Thanks for posting all of these.
Go to
Feb 29, 2024 09:11:09   #
Very impressive.
Go to
Feb 25, 2024 19:08:43   #
This did not work out for me and I am returning it. Missed too many pictures. Does not turn on viewer unless you push on it and then it cuts off the corners.
Go to
Jan 31, 2024 19:08:04   #
Look for billnikon here. Two great places near Boca. I will be there in next week.
Go to
Jan 31, 2024 15:01:41   #
ignore.
Go to
Jan 31, 2024 14:06:43   #
ignore.
Go to
Jan 31, 2024 13:30:42   #
I just bought it. Willing to give it a try. To return the favor of your post, I recommend very highly this screwdriver set. The smallest Phillips head one is to small for this application but you might still consider buying the set.

Thanks for posting.
Go to
Jan 25, 2024 20:02:13   #
robertjerl wrote:
Thanks very much.

Those flowers are such a pale pink they look white at first glance, and they have slick smooth light reflecting surfaces. To top it off they were in direct overhead sunlight. The dark background is an out of focus cedar tree.

I ran an anti-noise app at low setting, and the shutter speed is relatively low for that long a lens.


You are welcome. People do not realize how reflective the petals can be. I suspected you had denoised it. Nothing wrong with that.
Go to
Jan 25, 2024 09:11:39   #
Your two posts today are wonderful. Amazingly sharp and clean. ISO 3200 and no noise. How did you accomplish that? Wonderful depth of field at f/22 without any loss of sharpness due to the small aperture. Pretty nice. My only bone to pick on both shots is that the flowers are too bright. They vie for the eye's attention with the bee. I would have either dialed down their brightness or add a little vignette. I find the first post much better because of that lovely dark background and fewer distracting flowers.

Thanks for posting and showing what is possible.
Go to
Jan 22, 2024 13:24:02   #
Cany143 wrote:
In what way (or ways) do you feel your panorama is "not nearly as beautiful as the actual scene"? And by 'technique', are you asking for advice on camera technique or on processing technique?

I can only say how I'd have shot and --subsequently processed-- a scene like this, but I can't say that what I'd have done differently would have resulted in anything necessarily 'better', or would hopefully capture the perceived beauty of the actual scene. I can, however, say why what I would've done would've been true to my aesthetic, but I can't say it would've been true to your aesthetic. That said....

Leaving off mention of the obvious 'black edge' area where nothing was exposed and Stitcher (which I know nothing about; I use LrC and/or Ps instead) didn't fill that blank for you (which could easily be 'filled' --or eliminated altogether-- through any of several means, two visual issues come to mind. Both involve the foreground area of your image; the near-ground lies short of the depth of field/focus, short of the aperture/focus point you'd chosen (the camera 'fix' should be obvious --focus closer or use a smaller aperture) and the foreground might be a bit 'murkier' than might be optimal (the processing 'fix' should be equally obvious--raise the shadow values slightly and increase contrast and color values selectively, but doing so would be dependent on your processing skills and/or whatever editing software you may have).

Personally, I'd have focus-stacked a pano like this, and I'd likewise have processed the result as I mentioned above. But that would express my aesthetic, not yours.

<edit/addendum> Contrary to the comment above, I would NOT eliminate the little Joshua tree in the foreground center. If it had been better defined and been brightened somewhat, it's placement would've provided a subtle anchor for the remainder of the image. But doing so would require a re-shoot, so....
In what way (or ways) do you feel your panorama is... (show quote)


Good comments and I agree about out of focus tree. If it were sharp, then it could stay although I might prefer it to be off-center.
Go to
Jan 22, 2024 12:24:24   #
Thanks for posting and asking for help. The stitching is fine but you should pay attention to some other details. These are artistic issues so are opinions and not statements of fact. A higher horizon to emphasize the distance from me to the hills behind or a lower horizon to emphasize that great big beautiful sky.

While the exposure on the sky is ok, the foreground is too dark for my taste. If you shot raw, then you should have little trouble lightening it up slightly. You could also bracket your exposure and mask in Photoshop. After the sky and foreground are exposed properly, you could add very slight linear gradients from the top and bottom to draw the eye to those far off hills.

That little, out of focus cactus in the foreground is very distracting so I would remove it.

When shooting panoramas, I hold the camera vertically so I have more freedom in cropping later on.

Keep practicing and posting.
Go to
Jan 19, 2024 11:21:16   #
You made only one unforgivable sin: not shooting raw.
Go to
Jan 16, 2024 14:47:01   #
Very nice pictures. Thanks for posting but damn it, Cindy, you spelled dam wrong.
Go to
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 329 next>>
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.