Picture of the Day

[HotDiggity]

DSC_0093 by beezskis, on Flickr

[skiingislife]

[uglymoney]

[outabounds]

[DeutschBag]

That's gorgeous outabounds. Awesome shot!

I'm just now getting to pictures from the end of Feb and March. Here are two from a half-day trip to Dinkelsbühl, Germany a few months ago.

[Fuzz]

Awesome, awesome shot! EXIF info?

[FreakofSnow]

[Chainsaw_Willie]

Okay outabounds, now you're really pushing my buttons. I have got to know how you got that shot. Yeah, i can see the house was light-painted but how did you get the milky way?

Here's the best one from my weekend:




ETA: Why does this website display my portrait orientation pictures bigger than actual size? Makes 'em blurry looking...

To see an actual-size image that's nice and sharp, right click on the above image and select "view image." It'll display in a separate window at 950 pixels high.

[advres]

ETA: Why does this website display my portrait orientation pictures bigger than actual size? Makes 'em blurry looking...

To see an actual-size image that's nice and sharp, right click on the above image and select "view image." It'll display in a separate window at 950 pixels high.

Umm, what is being displayed in TGR IS your 950 pixel height image. When you right-click and open in another window your browser resizes it SMALLER to fit within your screen dimensions. If you hover over the image in that spereate window a magnifying glass will appear to allow you to blow it up to 100%, ie. 950 pixels in height.

If it looks blurry than it is either your picture taking skills or bad jpeg compression.

See:
Notice the image below my circle showing the image on TGR. It is the same width so as long as it didn't stretch your image vertically (it didn't), it is identical dimensions.

[outabounds]

Thanks DB.
Fuzz: 19mm, f/4.0, 50.7 seconds, ISO 1600
CW: First thing is a relatively wide open aperture to gather maximum light. To reduce lens distortion it's nice to be able to stop down a little, but the widest angle lens I have is the shitty kit lens that came with my D40 years ago. You need the highest ISO you can get away with. A lower ISO will give you less noise, but then you start getting motion blur with a longer exposure. I shot this with 3200 ISO and it was sharper, but my noise reduction skillz are pretty minimal, so I went with less sharp and less noise. On the computer I used GIMP's Curves tool, Wavelet Denoise plugin, and Unsharp Mask.

[Chainsaw_Willie]

Umm, what is being displayed in TGR IS your 950 pixel height image. ...snip...

Thanks for taking the time to post all that, but no, I am most definitely NOT seeing the original sized image when viewing it on this site. My monitor is 1680x1050 resolution and this website is displaying my 950 pixel high image large enough that I have to scroll up and down to see it all - it doesn't all fit on the screen. When I right-click/view image it displays it at 100% size with no magnifying glass cursor. The browser doesn't have to downsize it to fit on my screen, so this website or my browser is doing something funky.

Windows 7, Firefox 64-bit if that makes any difference. OTOH - I'm glad you're seeing it like it's supposed to look, I hope everyone else is too...

This is a screen capture from my computer showing how that image appears when reading this thread on the left and displayed at 100% size by the right click method overlayed on the right.

[Chainsaw_Willie]

Outabounds - thanks for the info! That looks great for that long of an exposure @ 1600 iso.

[supermodel159]

Soooo SICK!

[Edgnar]

Felt to sick to ride my bike today (that or its all the GD smoke from the fires in Arizona) and went down by the river to fool around with the camera. I was hoping to get something for the MPC but I didn't. Anyway, this one is sort of out of focus, but I sort of like it. I will gladly accept any feedback on these images, I'm trying to get better at this.

[outabounds]

Shoot the first one from a little further down the river so you're not chopping off the end of the whitewater. Better yet, shoot it from somewhere that will give you a better background.
Using a polarizer will let you see into the water for a better foreground.
Shoot it in the early morning or late evening.
Use a tripod and slow the shutter down to 1/4 to a full second or more.

,,,and of course, photoshop a shark in the water with lasers shooting out of its eyes.

Those are the things that come to my mind.

[Chainsaw_Willie]

A couple more from that trip:

[SchralphMacchio]

Thanks DB.
Fuzz: 19mm, f/4.0, 50.7 seconds, ISO 1600
CW: First thing is a relatively wide open aperture to gather maximum light. To reduce lens distortion it's nice to be able to stop down a little, but the widest angle lens I have is the shitty kit lens that came with my D40 years ago. You need the highest ISO you can get away with. A lower ISO will give you less noise, but then you start getting motion blur with a longer exposure. I shot this with 3200 ISO and it was sharper, but my noise reduction skillz are pretty minimal, so I went with less sharp and less noise. On the computer I used GIMP's Curves tool, Wavelet Denoise plugin, and Unsharp Mask.

very freaming awesome!

what was the light source on the house? Yours? Wonder if you could have gelled it to warm up the house? Reminds me of Gunder's Alta Star Trails shot ... I love both, but the contrast in color temperature also feels a bit harsh to me.

[Lev]

Dude, you are a bad bad man. That is ridiculous

[outabounds]

Thanks, Lev.

I agree, Shralph. I'd have gone with a warmer light on the house, but my friend (you're familiar with his light painting: http://www.flickr.com/photos/christopher-renfro/) lit the house and had set a different white balance. I bought a light tonight just for this sort of thing that puts out some good light but has a small enough lens to work with the gel samples I got from Lee Filters. Next time I'll do my own lighting. :-)

[HotDiggity]

Setting by beezskis, on Flickr

[AlexC]

I was out at Moses Creek waterfall in Revelstoke yesterday taking pictures. I don't have a neutral density filter so instead I took my clip-on sunglasses, held them over the lens and pressed the shutter. I think it came out alright.

[uglymoney]

Hand held from a moving boat. Palo, Iowa. F2.8 1/4000th 17mm ISO 400. Fast shutter speeds seem to be my friend.

[advres]

The 17mm doesn't hurt either.

[Edgnar]

Smoky sunset

[splitter]

fake gnd it, perhaps a little tighter crop...

a nice shot with a smidge of pp coule be more than nice...

definitely not overexposed, and a good comp, but could be tighter for a more interesting skyline/comp and more color...

warm it,bump the contrast, ever so slightly bump the saturation...

I bet it'll be good

Hand held from a moving boat. Palo, Iowa. F2.8 1/4000th 17mm ISO 400. Fast shutter speeds seem to be my friend.