Photography Thread
Comments
-
Can we still insert a link from Flickr? I can't work out how to do it and I think the photo is too large to upload directly
0 -
I gave up trying.
The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
There we go, had to resize it. Panorama of 6 shots breaking my obsession that landscapes should be in landscape format only! I didn't do a very good job with the angles between them so had to then crop it quite a bit but managed to get the main bits I wanted with Pleiades, Jupiter and the moon all in the frame. The long exposure makes the crescent moon far more dominant than I'd have liked but there's not much I could do about that and there's a fair bit of noise in the foreground. Shot at ISO 3200 and 20" exposure with 13mm lens at f2.8, I should probably have gone a bit shorter on the exposure as Pleiades and Jupiter look a bit distorted although that might be part of the impact of the stitching process.
0 -
Good lessons learned and progression.
Your next steps may be exposure blending which would fix your main issues in the shot above. I guess it get complicated doing both panoramic and exposure blending in a single finished shot.
The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
You should be able if you just use the link to the photo.
0 -
Yep, I took some with light painted foreground. I've managed to blend them into one foreground image in Photoshop and now just need to work out the sky replacement (it's like a mini star trail photo at the moment as it has the slightly different star location from each frame). It's good trying to put into practice the various tutorial videos I've watched on YouTube, there's some really good stuff out there being shared by very good professional photographers. A pet hate of mine is people who think they are too clever to share the skills they've learned
0 -
Yeah, Youtube. Excellent for photography, and bike maintenance. 😉
People I follow probably would have exposure blended my shot upthread.
The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
This is purely subjective (not right/wrong, better/worse) and possibly more of a focal length thing, but zoomed in more, without any lake at the bottom, might have been my preference. Having not been invited😔, actually being there would likely have an impact on any final editing.
Anyway, rather than just describing my thoughts, I did a quick edit: Impressive scenery, btw.
0 -
Nice work Pross. Maybe I'll have a go and head out one night. It would most likely be a single shot affair, so not capturing much detail. Thursday night looks clear.
0 -
Subjective as you say. Can't disagree with some of the crop but I was trying to preserve the frost on the water. Not that often I get the chance. 😉 The more muted sky will be preferred by some but it was definitely moody. Cheers!
The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.1 -
Last night was slightly frustrating, driving to my venue I couldn't see many stars which left me a bit concerned about cloud cover but when I got there I could see them clearly. However, the photos revealed that there was a very think layer of cloud that I couldn't see with the naked eye but which just meant the finer details don't show through. It worked OK with diffusing the moonlight but the target I'd originally gone to capture was the Cygnus region of the Milky Way to the northwest rising above the church tower. You can just about see it in this one (another 6 shot pano). The foreground is better on this one though, just less interest in the sky.
2 -
Best compared side by side. I definitely prefer the last one. Too much of a green hue in the first too, once noticed.
The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
A couple more sorry, the top one is 4 foreground images that were light painted from different angles then blended in Photoshop. The sky was then removed from 3 of them (I had a satellite crossing in 2 of them and was tempted to use one of those as the base but this was probably the best of the skies), I think the other was also light painted but is at a lower ISO (800 v 3200) and a single exposure. I think that's probably my favourite of them all as it's quite natural looking. It may have just been lit by the moon, I lost track of what was what to be honest. For future reference I think I'll drop the ISO to 1600 maximum and exposure time for sky shots to a 15" maximum to get the images as clean and sharp as possible whilst still being able to recover detail.
2 -
Yeah, interesting, I saw the frosty band at the bottom and wondered if a crop might work, but then decided you'd lose the frosty/snowy context, so even if on compositional grounds it's not ideal (I try to avoid horizontal bands with no real interest in themselves), I don't think it works without it. I might have reduced the saturation a touch on your processed image, PB, but that's a judgement I all too often get wrong myself, and I only realise the next morning when I look at it again. There seems to be a narrow window that preserves the luminosity which I think I've seen, between too little (and dull) and too much (like nuclear apocalypse).
0 -
Thanks! This is becoming an interesting thread as my shot highlights perception.
I never modified the sky, it is straight from the camera, but the modifications made to the landscape contrast to the sky giving the perception that it is now deeper, or more saturated. Shows how changing one thing affects everything.
Try a before and after side by side comparison to see what I mean, if you can. The before version was posted last night.
Full disclosure - The only modifications were cooling the white balance in the lower half and a bit of Levels to lighten the lower half. No other modifications made to colour or saturation.
The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
Haha, that is very interesting! Thanks PB. Must calibrate my eyes...
0 -
In the phone app go to the photo you want, tap the share icon and select 'copy URL'. Then on BR, click the [< >] symbol and paste in the URL.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
Not really. The sky in the processed shot does look more saturated. That's why I said "perception". Interesting.
The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.1 -
I just see a thumbnail in your posts though. Not what I want to show.
The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
Oh. Shows full size on my phone.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
What I see. Could be my settings though. 🤔
That said, your screenshot above has displayed okay.
The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
That's the same for me... just a thumbnail, on the laptop.
0 -
It might be that the new forum won't display any images bigger than a certain file size, whether direct upload or linked, on laptop browsers.
The screenshot would be a smaller file, of course.
0 -
Obviously I now consider myself a tech guru as I got my new mail merge extension to work perfectly first time.
0 -
Was hoping for a heavy frost and an interesting sunrise, but I was thwarted on both. Cold, but virtually no frost. Brrrgrrr.
2 -
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition3 -
There was a white over this morning, more hail than powder, but still looked picturesque in the sunrise. Didn’t manage to take anything, but actually caught a sunset- it’s been a while. I had it split 50-50, but cropped to 16:9 as the beach reflections were too bold.
A handsome fella.
5 -
Same here. -5c, Frozen hands, no frost, no clouds for a dramatic sunrise, no lead lines...Most disappointing.
The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.2 -
These 2 fine locals playing with a brick yesterday on my walk
0 -
Making the most of the clear nights before normal service resumes at the weekend. A quick stop off at Pontypool Folly Tower on my way home from choir. Conditions weren't ideal due to a half moon in addition to the light pollution (particularly looking south towards Cwmbran and Newport) plus a bit of a breeze that I think may have contributed to the star trails on the one. Generally quite happy with them though, it makes a really nice subject and I'll be back up there on a clear night when the Milky Way core is visible again and there is no moon. Had to crop the forground too much in the one shot looking towards Newport due to the amount of perspective correction that was needed.
4
