Posts for: Whyfret1
Oct 11, 2020 08:41:23 #
As I stated, I am a newbie. I don't know how to determine what constitutes digital noise? How to determine what is going to result in digital noise? How many megapixels are required at what zoom = a shot that can be printed large scale? Where do I go to learn about this?
Sep 28, 2013 19:54:16 #
I am camping and met up with a fellow and I am in awe of his Canon SX 50 capabilities. My 650D with a 300mm lens was pathetic in comparison. I'm a newbie so perhaps my perspective is due to naivety. Where I am going with this? I am asking for feedback regarding the SX versus another option. I want the zoom potential but would also like more MP if possible.
Any and all opinions welcomed
Any and all opinions welcomed
Sep 20, 2013 05:52:41 #
Be aware of respiratory problems! I had to leave an event because of a severe reaction!
Sep 11, 2013 09:45:55 #
I use the tethered and it annoys the heck out of me; always in the way. I've lost a few from my pocket . Thanks for the information and I will look into it
Aug 8, 2013 06:13:37 #
gawler wrote:
took these the other day , still had the 7d set to tungstan light from the night before - always(check settings before seeing bird lol ), i like the effect , tracy dislikes wondered what others thought
I love them! Especially the close up
Aug 7, 2013 16:03:41 #
jeep_daddy wrote:
You want a minimum of 240-300 pixels/inch, so you just do the math and use your software to see what the pixel dimensions are. So an 8x10 would be 8x240 on the short side and 10x240 on the long side or 1920x2400 minimum. Most printers actually print best at 300ppi
Thank you so much for your patience. I now know what to look for
Aug 7, 2013 15:54:58 #
jeep_daddy wrote:
You want a minimum of 240-300 pixels/inch, so you just do the math and use your software to see what the pixel dimensions are. So an 8x10 would be 8x240 on the short side and 10x240 on the long side or 1920x2400 minimum. Most printers actually print best at 300ppi
Thank you so much for your patience. I now know what to look for
Aug 7, 2013 14:06:40 #
Apjar307 wrote:
I understand your question. I think that you could go to Sam's Club or Costco and have a decent size print made for a few dollars, and see if you like the results. Sam's = 12x16 is $2.96 and 16x20 is $5.96. 20x24 is $7.96.
That way you will have a print for a little outlay, and be able to see your results.
That way you will have a print for a little outlay, and be able to see your results.
I think you are absolutely correct! Generally speaking , is this the only way to know if I was contemplating ever submitting for a contest? Via web or print ? Does a semi professional always have to print to see exactly what they have ?
Aug 7, 2013 10:13:49 #
PRETENDER wrote:
I,myself would be extremly happy to have gotten this picture. I'm curious as to what you expect of the picture?
When I viewed it through the LCD, it appeared to have more detail and contrast in the wings. It looks "faded" to me. I am considering a better lens as this is a kit lens . Would that make any difference! I just don't feel as though I get the depth of color that I hope for. I do understand that this particular bird is gray but I was curious what someone with more experience and better equipment would have captured?
Aug 7, 2013 08:43:41 #
Dlevon wrote:
As an aside there's truth to that. As a retired architect I have to comment that every building I go into or see, the first thing I notice are the flaws. I just can't help myself. After I see the flaws I can then see all the good qualities! I guess it comes with being a professional.
Good point !
Aug 7, 2013 08:42:08 #
I thank each of you for your review and supportive comments . I hope I am not one that can never fully appreciate my own work ! Seems that when I initially examine my shots, I don't see what I see after allowing some time to pass and then go back. I just am in awe of how others pics are so clear and crisp ; almost surreal
Aug 7, 2013 08:25:17 #
Dlevon wrote:
That's why professionals lose a lot of the enjoyment of life! Hah!
Too funny !
Aug 6, 2013 20:30:03 #
Linda From Maine wrote:
You might want to upload the photo here, and select the "store original" option, so that people can check it for you. Use reply or quote reply, and there will be a place to add attachment below the message box.
Thank you Linda! And "yes" I forget about the "reply and quote " option!
Aug 6, 2013 20:20:12 #
I can't count how many shots it took me to get this. Through my LCD, it looked fabulous! Thought I had a magnificent shot but then came the let down.
I used a 300mm lens and stood relatively close. I did not have tripod with me so I leaned against another tree. The lighting was the best I could get and the angle of the hole in tree limited where I could position myself.
Why is this picture so blah! Not crisp, not sharp and certainly no pizazz!
I am a beginner so keep it simple for me.
Thanks
I used a 300mm lens and stood relatively close. I did not have tripod with me so I leaned against another tree. The lighting was the best I could get and the angle of the hole in tree limited where I could position myself.
Why is this picture so blah! Not crisp, not sharp and certainly no pizazz!
I am a beginner so keep it simple for me.
Thanks
Aug 6, 2013 19:53:00 #
Jeep daddy,
How do I know what the sharpness or quality of a 8x10 print would be? I know professionals can look a picture and see the flaws however an untrained eye may see a fabulous print.
How do I know what the sharpness or quality of a 8x10 print would be? I know professionals can look a picture and see the flaws however an untrained eye may see a fabulous print.