Quake3World

This one is tone compressed, I actually merged them all in PS fist, but I wans't actually amazed by the result. Also, I'm a total PS noob anyway.

Dave wrote:Oh, I take that back.. the one of the house was shot at 800 because I forgot my remote at work and wanted more depth of field.

Actually I was wondering how you got to the photograph the stars in the background. What was the exposure time there? And yo did used a tripod for that shot right?

The second one looks much better. You can't see as much detail under the bridge, but all the noise is gone. You can probably fix some noise in your first shot by increasing the contrast. The sky will get darker and the noise will fade in more.

tripod, 30s, f /5.6, under exposed .5 stop from what the in-camera meter said. I have my digital cams set to move in 1/2 stops because that's how my Hasselblads work.

Looks better indeed tnx.

Btw, did you take any photograpy lessons at some points or are did you learn all this by yourself?

Here's a pic of my dinner from the other night. Not sure why i took the pic, but doesn't it look tasty?

One other thing you might want to be aware of is the distortion you can get from diffraction. The noise isn't that big of a deal, but with small pixels especially, you can get diffraction issues in your photos at apertures around f/13 and smaller that add to the normal sensitivity noise. 35mm lenses are usually best at f/8, but f/11 is fine. You can always go farther, but just be aware of it.

And here I thought Yanks only eat crap food. Looks tasty.

I'm hungry now...

Dave wrote:One other thing you might want to be aware of is the distortion you can get from diffraction. The noise isn't that big of a deal, but with small pixels especially, you can get diffraction issues in your photos at apertures around f/13 and smaller that add to the normal sensitivity noise. 35mm lenses are usually best at f/8, but f/11 is fine. You can always go farther, but just be aware of it.

Damn, I know I'm photography noob but not at the point that I have no idea what you just said now.

I'll keep in mind tho

MaCaBr3 wrote:Btw, did you take any photograpy lessons at some points or are did you learn all this by yourself?

I've taken two classes, but they didn't teach me anything technical except doing wet lab things with B&W. We mostly looked at books of other photographers and each others work. The technical discussion only came up when someone was consistently doing something dumb.

MaCaBr3 wrote:

Dave wrote:One other thing you might want to be aware of is the distortion you can get from diffraction. The noise isn't that big of a deal, but with small pixels especially, you can get diffraction issues in your photos at apertures around f/13 and smaller that add to the normal sensitivity noise. 35mm lenses are usually best at f/8, but f/11 is fine. You can always go farther, but just be aware of it.

Damn, I know I'm photography noob but not at the point that I have no idea what you just said now.

I'll keep in mind tho

Most people don't know about diffraction... I'm sure tnf knows a thing or two. It has to do with distortion waves caused by extremely small apertures. Light and water behave similarly.

sorry, it really doesnt look tasty.... well prepared, a lot of work put in? definately. I just dont eat meat.

Noise affects photos? cooooool.

Dave wrote:

MaCaBr3 wrote:

Dave wrote:One other thing you might want to be aware of is the distortion you can get from diffraction. The noise isn't that big of a deal, but with small pixels especially, you can get diffraction issues in your photos at apertures around f/13 and smaller that add to the normal sensitivity noise. 35mm lenses are usually best at f/8, but f/11 is fine. You can always go farther, but just be aware of it.

Damn, I know I'm photography noob but not at the point that I have no idea what you just said now.

I'll keep in mind tho

Most people don't know about diffraction... I'm sure tnf knows a thing or two. It has to do with distortion waves caused by extremely small apertures. Light and water behave similarly.

I know about the physics of diffraction as it relates the behavior of light and waves in general. Unfortunately, my photography knowledge is lacking way, way, way behind. This summer I'm going to go through a book on beginning photography that can introduce me to the simple concepts in a coherent and flowing manner.

MaCaBr3 wrote:And here I thought Yanks only eat crap food. Looks tasty.

that's because you type in stereo.

Fanatic X wrote:

Awesome.......defished?

MaCaBr3 wrote:My first nightshot and HDR pictures:

Btw, can you guys fix these pictures in PS or tell me what to do. Or maybe there is just something wrong with my lens cuz it looks awfully grainy and it's only shot in ISO 400.

Love this one.....I thought the Atomium was falling apart in rusty parts

They restored it completely and it's all shiny now.

Waiting in a restaurant for our food. Played a bit with my 28mm f2.8 manual focus, had to set aperture and shutterspeed myself without metering

MaCaBr3 wrote:They restored it completely and it's all shiny now.

If they would restore Belgium from Flanders and Wallonia

saturn wrote:Waiting in a restaurant for our food. Played a bit with my 28mm f2.8 manual focus, had to set aperture and shutterspeed myself without metering

ah, nice man!

I don't own a fisheye anymore. Had the Canon 15mm a few years ago but didn't feel the need to re-acquire another one.

Keep those photos coming guys...

I'm off to a rally this weekend and hopefully will get a few decent shots.

Some cool work in that gallery, nice!

Got my hands on a 60mm Nikon macro lens. Excellent optics and build. I had to shoot an obligatory close-up flowershot of course.

somehow I always seem to tilt a little to the left, gotta learn to control that