Photography Thread
Comments
-
Agree, that was a quick edit on the phone as I didn’t have the cable to connect to my laptop. I’ve now realised that as I’ve transferred them to my phone via the Canon app I can upload to my laptop with the phone cable so will edit properly tonight.
1 -
Really annoyed with myself for not rechecking focus after moving. I messed up what should have been some decent shots. I did take the ones at our cabin again but the aurora had died down a bit by then.
0 -
Look on the bright side. While you were concentrating on all the other things required to take these shots you weren't thinking about what else is going on in the world. Good for mental health.
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 -
Bit of editing done now. I like the composition of the ruin (Black Middens Bastle House, 16th century fortified farmhouse) but I can never get the colours quite how I like.
5 -
Just a couple of phone snaps today as it was pissing down most of the time so I didn't want to damage the camera. Cragside was quite atmospheric in the mist (and a very interesting place) then onto Lindisfarne / Holy Island. Didn't manage to photograph the seals we saw or the 3 roe deer that decide to cross the causeway right in front of my car.
4 -
Ooooo! Much better. This is the answer when people ask me why I bother spending the time post processing.
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 -
Just a heads up but it looks like there could be incredibly strong aurora tonight (proper dancing columns) and I think the skies are looking like being clear in many places. Worth grabbing your camera / phone and getting away from light pollution as much as possible.
3 -
Sky cleared for just long enough to take this panorama at Llandegfedd Reservoir. Shame about the cloud although it maybe adds something to the scene. The intensity died and it clouded over just aftyer I took the final shot (30 in total - I overlapped by far more than necessary and had a fair bit more at the top that didn't make the crop). I actually knocked the saturation down and took teh exposure down slightly from what I shot, it didn't need 15" tonight. ISO 1600, F2.8 and 15" with each frame taken at 16mm .
6 -
Can't beat Pross for the foreground but I didn't have to travel any further than 10 feet from my back door. 😉
Fortunate to get 2 in completely different directions at different times. Both SOOC, 30 seconds, f3.4, ISO 100, 18mm
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.6 -
Out of my bedroom window. Taken with the phone on a 20sec exposure. Handheld then cropped to take the house out.
Wasn't visible with the naked eye to me in Sussex but liking the silhouette of the oak.
3 -
Some aren't the best but I'm still giving likes out for the aurora effort.
You're welcome.
1 -
I got my photo with the Aurora / STEVE with the farmhouse put onto canvas (600mm x 450mm 20mm thick). I was a bit worried that the colours would be wrong as we’ve discussed before how different the image can look on different displays. I ordered yesterday morning with this company https://www.tradecanvasprint.co.uk/ the website allowed me to upload the full 300mB TIFF file which none of the big companies did. It turned up today. It’s exactly the same as on my screen and the wife had already hung it by time I got home. I’d highly recommend them for anyone looking to get prints of a favourite photo. It was only after ordering I discovered they’re in a tiny village where we go for Sunday lunch when staying at the in-laws caravan.
3 -
Just out of curiosity, which one of the three did you get printed? I'd have went for #1 but that's irrelevant.
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 -
Yep, that’s my favourite composition by far. The others were more to capture the weird white streak that is the now famous STEVE. That first one is also really high definition as it was a 15 shot panorama albeit cropped a bit. I was really pleased how it came out on canvas. I had a previous Milky Way photo done as a print and it came back really dark so I’ve never put it up.
1 -
Thanks for the tip about canvas printing, Pross - useful to know. I've had some done by Photobox in the past, including a 3x2ft one I've got in front of me right now, but good to hear of somewhere else that does a really good job.
Meanwhile, at Two Bridges yesterday morning...
3 -
There was a beautiful lunar corona when I was walking the dogs, basically a circular rainbow around the road from the bright moon behind thin clouds diffracting the water in the clouds. Grabbed my camera when I got in the house but the cloud had cleared by then.
0 -
Must go out and have a look.
Meanwhile, on the ride home... taken on my £140 Samsung.
2 -
Not overwhelmed, either by the moon, or the ability of my camera to capture both ground and bright moon. My aged eyes do a much better job.
0 -
Full moon in a landscape are a real challenge for any camera. It needs a composite really to deal with the different exposures.
0 -
Yeah. TBH, even a full moon by itself in darkness is a challenge for my cheapo gear, let alone trying to get anything in the foreground.
0 -
IIRC a "supermoon appears 30% bigger than a standard moon. Trouble is the standard moon appears to be about the size of your pinkie nail at arms length (try it 😏). Our brains interpret it as being much bigger than it actually is which is why photos are generally 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.1 -
Yeah it’s not helped that you get people shooting it rising behind buildings miles and miles away with 600mm lenses that make it look huge so then when some with the sort of kit most people have (phone, compact or DSLR with kit lens) it looks puny. Others just use editing software to make the moon bigger in comparison.
0 -
Quick dash up to the roof for the sunset.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition6 -
Like the second one. The first has the distracting blown lights. Nice lighting otherwise.
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 -
^The first pic has a hovel sign, they'll never get any guests😀.
First post in a while.
Tricksy customers these, hiding away in the dark and dank, making things as awkward as they can. I had to discount many due to their short lifespan (manky) or having been readily chomped by ??? squirrels?
I was going to buy an RGB LED light, but instead improvised a shiny foil sandwich bag (with a cardboard insert for stiffness) as a reflector to get some extra gill detail. Subtle but works.
It's been so long since I've posted, I seem to have forgotten how to edit the Flickr link.
Hmm. Mushrooms BTW
0 -
'Tis at full zoom on a phone so am surprised it is not more blurry.
When the sun sets you get about 5-10minutes of Canary Wharf catching the sun after everything is dark but a proper lens would definitely help.
A less cluttered attempt.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition2 -
I do prefer the post sunset glow to the standard full on sunset.
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 -
.
0 -
After a reboot (laptop and brain) it worked.
6 -
