Chuck wrote:
I bought a card to get my custom white balance but my pics have greenish tint. What did I do wrong?
You use the wb card when you take a photo, just like jwilliams uses his white sheet of paper. You are merely using the reflected light that is hitting your subject, rather than one of the stored settings (shade, clouds, beach, tungsten, etc), to let the camera know what kind of light is available.
Take a trip to yer local lowes or home depot, go to the plumbing dept. Get 2 pieces of plastic pipe: an end cap and a short piece to fit inside of it, either big enuf to hold all 3 legs, or big enuf for just one leg (your choice). Needs to be deep enuf so legs don't jump out if ya hit a bump. A U bolt, couple washers, 2 nuts, 2 holes drilled in side of pipe for the bolts, glue the 2 pieces together; attach to bike, bunge cord the top.
One solution can be found at http://hoodmanusa.com/ . Look for "photo frames". They are flip up lenses. I got a pair and found they work well.
whichever site you choose, pay attention to print sizes. If you tend to panoramics or unconventional sizes, some sizes are more tolerant that others in what they allow. They can crop down your image to a more conventional size to suit their needs. If this isn't a big concern for you tho, no prob...
You need to check a few review sites (like www.dpreview.com or
www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews ) and see what they say. Not all your lenses need be "L" quality glass. I use an EF-S 15-85mm F3.5-5.6 IS USM that can show good results. Sure and we'd all like to afford nothing but-top-of-the-line; but it ain't gonna happen now is it :-) ? Decide what your needs are, then search for lenses that meet those needs. Reason you may not find specific answers is everyone's taste is different. What they look for in a lens may differ from what you're looking for.
The reason for the caps was to draw attention to the msg. It was not about yelling. It had nothing to do with everyone continually asking same/similar questions as you implied. It did draw attention apparently. That is the trouble with txting/msging/e-mail etc. you are limited in how you respond. You are limited in how long your response can be. Maximum impact with minimum effort. caps or no caps, msg is the same. Sorry if you felt offended. No great knowledge either. 16-17 yrs ago, less than a year.
TO ALL ASKING ABOUT INSURANCE: PICK UP YOUR PHONE, CALL YOUR AGENT, YOUR QUESTIONS WILL BE ANSWERED.
MY POLICY IS JUST A SIMPLE RIDER. I SENT A LIST OF MY EQUIPMENT ALONG WITH RECEIPTS (for verification). COUPLE DAYS LATER GOT A QUOTE AND A $LIMIT. IT WAS FOR PERSONAL, NOT BIZ, USAGE; COVERS THEFT, FROM CAR OR HOME, ACCIDENTAL BREAKAGE, FIRE, WATER, STORM, ETC AND COMES WITH REPL COST. BIZ USAGE CAN COVER MUCH LARGER AMTS (VIRTUALLY LIMITLESS) FOR MUCH HIGHER PRICES, OF COURSE. BUT IT WILL NOT BE UNDER YOUR HOMEOWNERS POLICY (PERSONAL USE)
Rustykeys wrote:
Yes, I believe these are both Great Blue Herons. And he was not being very cooperative like you said. I was sure he was going to disappear on me any minute. I like your Green Heron. I have a shot of a White Heron but it's so far away you can't really make out any detail.
I too have limited photo editing software. Just what came with my camera. I want software bad, but have other priorities. Maybe Santa will bring my wish. :)
picasa by google is free -- simple editing and organizer; gimp for windows is free -- pretty good editor, tho has a steep learning curve (probably no greater than PS). Those are just 2 of many FREE progs available. PS Elements v9.x is only about 80 bucks, which is about the lowest priced prog I would consider (anything else wouldn't give as good results with such ease).
No one who's photographed a sunrise, sunset, a mountain glen, a child discovering its 1st butterfly has been untouched; they have all had a spiritual moment, it goes with the territory.
As for your camera settings: why, it allows others an insite to your methods, a way of seeing how you captured a photo so pleasing. They ARE enjoying the moment...
bobmielke wrote:
My apartment insurance is with Travelers Insurance Company. It covers all contents at full replacement value for up to $30,000. That includes full coverage while on vacation or carried in my car. Cost - $115 a year.
Havng sold insurance at one time, and having recently purchased a rider policy for my camera & equipment, you might want to check the limits on items covered. Cash might only be for $500-1000; jewelry, guns, computers all have replacement cost limits, and those limits may be less than their actual worth. My camera equip even with a rider, has a $5000 limit. Each ins co has its own set limits and you need to be aware of them.
vorlon1 wrote:
beacher wrote:
Seems the post is wandering afield... Looking at examples of HDR pics is not the point. My original post had to do with the genuineness of the process, not "did I get it right or not". I did not start the post to critique others work, but to try to understand the process, overdone as many seem to prefer. What I perceive as heavy-handedness, others see as photographic style. My plebian taste is offended, my utter lack of sophistication will always show thru. Sorry :) . I admit I am in a decidedly small minority; books, programs, magazines, websites and blogs seem to contradict me. I just try'n ta unnerstan'... Actually, jkaye65 showed us 2 fine examples that say what I feel better than I'M saying it! :thumbup:
Seems the post is wandering afield... Looking at e... (
show quote)
I appreciate your view about HDR, some have a surrealistic look. I have recently started using it to try and create a natural look, but with better highlights and details than the usual methods capture. The link below from my Flickr account is a panorama that was created from several HDR processed photos each of which was made into an HDR from 3 separate exposures of -1, 0 and +1. I believe the result came out looking sharp, but not over processed. I would be interested in your view of that. Thanks. I hope it is viewable, I couldn't figure out how to get it to show in my post.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/64775760@N07/6160403688/in/photostream/
quote=beacher Seems the post is wandering afield.... (
show quote)
jkaye65 and blueeyes3515 -- from their pic posts -- seem to understand my viewpoint. Most HDR pics I pick right out. Their pics have a subtle look that enhances the exposure, rather than each and every element in their photos. their work on the exposure seems to meld together to form a whole.
dirty dave wrote:
what about this one is it better?
Sorry dirty dave. All I see are orange rocks, blue snow, green and blue water. I don't get it. That's what I'm talking about. I just don't get it...
blueeyes3515 wrote:
I do however see things that could and should have been corrected in PS CS5!
Tasteful. Subtle. Beautiful. Even follows the golden ratio (of triangles)! Good job blueeyes3515
Jaime wrote:
Very nice. I don't know which editing software you are using, but #1 can be straightened... but some grain on these, a little more contrast and you could sell them... they're THAT good. Nice.
Pic seems str8-- unless ya want the tunnel sloping downhill to the right. Lighting seems ok; yer editing seems a little heavy-handed to me, a little too dark.
Pics look pretty good to me. But then, I don't have a lot of experience, so grain of salt, ya know...?