Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: dar_clicks
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 92 next>>
Sep 10, 2020 18:41:14   #
"May" Fly -- yeah, I know ... they always show up in September! Maybe delay was from laundry trouble with the socks -- left foot is red stripes, right foot is green stripes.

This guy is rather tiny. The photo's focus was at 1:1 macro. I cropped the photo down to 0.6 of width & height (before reducing size for posting & e-Mail) so what is shown within the borders below represents a view of roughly 7/8" x 5/8".


(Download)


Go to
Aug 13, 2020 19:48:16   #
camerapapi wrote:
I keep on working with photographs from my archives to convert them to b&w. To those new to my b&w posts I add a little bit of warmth to the images to simulate my favorite b&w printing paper, Agfa fiber base.
Notice that those images with great contrast between bright and dark areas lend themselves to better conversions. If not familiar with b&w filters they change their complimentary colors and with digital it is as easy as experimenting. There are excellent softwares to edit conversions and Topaz along with Nik make excellent softwares.

Photoshop and, I figure Photoshop Elements have channels and conversions found in Image>Adjust>Black and White to use filters or presets so we have plenty of sofwares out there to make conversions. I also use Affinity Photo which works pretty similar to Photoshop
Enjoy.
I keep on working with photographs from my archive... (show quote)


You have done some very nice work there! A question, if I may -- Do you ever miss doing chemical B&W?
Go to
Jun 26, 2020 15:20:22   #
This flowering bush is mostly on its way to being a tree. Each year some older branches don't stay viable and become "sticks" instead. This branch wasn't having any of that and unlike others surrounding it produced a few leaves and berries which got my attention for making a photograph.

Image is from a Nikon D90 that was converted to 720 nanometer infrared. I like doing B&W conversion from that setup. A slight tint was added in the B&W conversion. I still can't get my selected sRGB color space assignment to stick with the photo therefore the display on this web page is slightly darker than at home with some added contrast that darkens the background more -- an option I had once considered during post processing anyhow. -- See Download for a closer look --


(Download)


Go to
Jun 18, 2020 16:50:13   #
dar_clicks wrote:
I have this 18-140 zoom lens that I usually just keep on the D90 Infrared camera body. That is a DX or APS-C setup regarding sensor size, i.e. "DX" in Nikon terms being smaller than the "FX" or full-size sensor in my D700.

I got to wondering what would happen if I attached my 1.4X TC (teleconverter) to the lens and used it on my D700. I already knew the DX lens wouldn't fill the entire FX frame. So why do it? That lens is the only one I have that has image stabilization and I thought it might be okay for a small distant subject where I'd crop down and only use the center pixels of the frame anyway. Surprise, surprise! It not only filled the FX frame on the D700, but did so at full zoom on the 140 mm end of its range where that arrangement would usually yield the smallest image circle. Depending on the particular lens, the wide-angle end of the zoom range can fill or almost fill the FX frame with this kind of setup.

No, I don't recommend this as sound practice to follow. I was just surprised and wanted to pass it along. I would suspect that the "unexpectedly filled" edges are probably not as sharp as a "correct" lens would produce, etc., but that's beside the point.

The attached full-frame photo from the D700/TC/DX lens combo (max zoom & not cropped) was just a quick hand-held test shot above the roofs of some houses at the end of the street. I used Photoshop to remove part of a transformer near the bottom left side of the photo and a cluster of wires leading to it. I also removed a couple of overhead wires that went from the lower left side of the photo toward the red-colored tree on the right, plus the top of a vent or chimney that was at the bottom center of the photo. For illustrative purposes I didn't want to crop the photo but didn't like that kind of junk in a scenic view either. There was a little bit of vignetting at the corners, but no more than some lenses normally do. View the download for a closer look (full frame but reduced in size for web and e-Mail -- it displays approx. 12" x 8" on my monitor).
I have this 18-140 zoom lens that I usually just k... (show quote)


Edit: I have an error in my original entry -- The last time I had experimented with this was at a family gathering in 2012 when a couple of us swapped lenses and I had not remembered the results correctly.

The frame coverage is more complete at the telephoto end of the zoom's range. The circle of coverage gets smaller toward the wide-angle end. I apologize for getting that wrong earlier. My experimenting this time was using the maximum telephoto setting which had resulted in fairly decent coverage of the frame.
Go to
Jun 18, 2020 14:53:34   #
Regis wrote:
Hand held at 600 mm. Distance was about 30-35 feet.

Canon 5Dsr - Canon 300 2.8 II - Canon 2x III - 1/1000 - f/10 - ISO @ 500.


Wow!
Go to
Jun 18, 2020 13:50:43   #
I have this 18-140 zoom lens that I usually just keep on the D90 Infrared camera body. That is a DX or APS-C setup regarding sensor size, i.e. "DX" in Nikon terms being smaller than the "FX" or full-size sensor in my D700.

I got to wondering what would happen if I attached my 1.4X TC (teleconverter) to the lens and used it on my D700. I already knew the DX lens wouldn't fill the entire FX frame. So why do it? That lens is the only one I have that has image stabilization and I thought it might be okay for a small distant subject where I'd crop down and only use the center pixels of the frame anyway. Surprise, surprise! It not only filled the FX frame on the D700, but did so at full zoom on the 140 mm end of its range where that arrangement would usually yield the smallest image circle. Depending on the particular lens, the wide-angle end of the zoom range can fill or almost fill the FX frame with this kind of setup.

No, I don't recommend this as sound practice to follow. I was just surprised and wanted to pass it along. I would suspect that the "unexpectedly filled" edges are probably not as sharp as a "correct" lens would produce, etc., but that's beside the point.

The attached full-frame photo from the D700/TC/DX lens combo (max zoom & not cropped) was just a quick hand-held test shot above the roofs of some houses at the end of the street. I used Photoshop to remove part of a transformer near the bottom left side of the photo and a cluster of wires leading to it. I also removed a couple of overhead wires that went from the lower left side of the photo toward the red-colored tree on the right, plus the top of a vent or chimney that was at the bottom center of the photo. For illustrative purposes I didn't want to crop the photo but didn't like that kind of junk in a scenic view either. There was a little bit of vignetting at the corners, but no more than some lenses normally do. View the download for a closer look (full frame but reduced in size for web and e-Mail -- it displays approx. 12" x 8" on my monitor).


(Download)


Go to
May 20, 2020 11:59:08   #
CSand wrote:
Yes Linda. Going crazy lately
. with my laptop and a second larger screen I bought just for post work. Suppose to be correct color on large screen which happens to look correct to my eyes. The laptop looks darker to me. I think my exports are from laptop. Have asked around and simply do not know what to do about it. Not good with computer stuff. So yes, you are completely correct. They are too dark.


I'm using the same old computer I always have to post on UHH and recently when I display the photo I send side-by-side with the same photo as displayed on UHH, the UHH version shows up darker and with more contrast. I also don't know what is causing that, whether I need to change the color profile of the JPG I'm trying to send or what?? Whatever is happening, most times the change absolutely destroys how the photo looks so I don't complete the process of posting it on UHH. I'm not having that problem with normal e-Mails to others, etc. Anyway, I have pretty much stopped posting photos for several months because of it.
Go to
May 19, 2020 20:07:53   #
Dixiegirl wrote:
Beautiful and very different examples of refraction, Linda! I love the first still life image, and the second is lovely in form and color! I looked everywhere for one of my droplet pics but couldn't find it, so the crystal ball in the swamp will have to do. For those not familiar with the crystal ball (or photo ball), the image in the ball is upside down. I chose to change mine by making a selection of the ball and then giving it a vertical flip.
Beautiful and very different examples of refractio... (show quote)


Good idea on the selection flip! I'll have to try that some day.
Go to
May 19, 2020 20:02:02   #
water falls wrote:
Cropped


The pose, view of it from your position, flowers, and background are all put together very well. Nice work!
Go to
Apr 8, 2020 13:26:52   #
Architect1776 wrote:
I was going through some of my older Canon equipment today in anticipation of the new R5.
Just thinking of no glass in the adapter any more and IBIS.
Here is the R2000 and I have several R lenses now that can come to life in the digital world along with the FL and FD lenses.
Exciting times coming with the R5 and helping get through this isolation. Work is keeping me busy but miss the personal staff interactions.


I don't know whether you are aware that if those selenium light meters are periodically exposed to light, like sitting it in a window (I avoid direct sunlight, though), it can be kept usable. If in the dark for long periods of time they will lose their accuracy or fail to work at all. Just for the fun of it, I've kept an old (1960s) Vivitar hand-held selenium meter going as well as it ever did (no Gossen Luna Pro to be sure!) just by "recharging" it in a well-lit environment now and then. It is still handy and plenty accurate enough to take along when using an old rangefinder camera, etc.
Go to
Apr 8, 2020 12:54:05   #
selmslie wrote:
Exposure compensation came with any film camera that offered auto exposure in any form. That's because manufacturers knew that the camera's meter could often be wrong.

First came aperture priority. When shutter priority was added, program mode could also be added.

Digital only added the ability to select ISO on the fly, manually or automatically.


An example of EC on a 35mm film camera: A Miranda Sensorex had a match needle system that was visible in the viewfinder. The camera's metering would move an arm with a circle at its end. The photographer would set the shutter speed and then move the other match needle -- to the center for no EC or to the top or bottom of the circle for 1 stop aperture adjustment, and of course 1/2 way between for 1/2 stop (either way), etc. If familiar with the shape of the metering area used by that camera and also understood the lighting in the scene it was quite accurate and easy to use w/o taking one's eye off the viewfinder. Other SLRs also had their own match needle methods or exposure indicators back then.
Go to
Apr 7, 2020 18:57:30   #
I see someone else identified it before I could -- We have those in the Salt Lake Valley, too. They just sort of show up all by themselves and make very nice photography subjects!
Go to
Apr 7, 2020 18:25:37   #
joer wrote:
They don't sit still for long.


Nice capture! . . . and you're right -- I'm surprised it sat still long enough for you to get a photo that nice!
Go to
Mar 14, 2020 19:37:06   #
tinusbum wrote:
ant mimic jumping spider,2x1,3x1 and some in between


Good Work!
Go to
Jan 24, 2020 15:33:51   #
PhotoPhred wrote:
Out for a drive on a cold day, trying out my new Tamron 150-600mm, from Santa, on my d7100.


Several decades ago I'd shocked bundles of oats from the binder so they'd dry before threshing, but have never seen that done to corn stalks before. Is that an Amish practice? I sure wish I'd used a camera back in the day to record some of those sights, like a field of shocked oats!
Go to
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 92 next>>
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.