Picture of the Day

[SchralphMacchio]

hey I never saw you at Momart on Sunday!!! We was definitely there for the 2nd set of the band ... even had the 10-22 on my camera as a telltale sign that it was really me and not some red-door subaru driving fakie ...

[splitter]

hey I never saw you at Momart on Sunday!!! We was definitely there for the 2nd set of the band ... even had the 10-22 on my camera as a telltale sign that it was really me and not some red-door subaru driving fakie ...

I think you're talkin' to me...

I's there, for a small period of time...

I's lookin' for you but missed ya...

windows were small but powdery...

i even posted me a tee-arr...

http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/s...oga?highlight=

[uglymoney]

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

Thanks! I'll play with it a little more. I did bump the contrast and just hit the saturation a tiny bit but I wanted it to look like it actually did that morning. It wasn't a crazy red sunrise, what made it cool was the glass water with those brilliant rays of light coming off of the sun from behind the clouds. I always feel like I'm overcropping stuff so lately I've been 'trying' to back off. I only cropped it ever so slightly after I leveled it.

I'm not sure what you mean by this:

Splitter wrote "fake gnd it,
a smidge of pp coule be more than nice..."

Care to elaborate? I appreciate the comments and suggestions!

[splitter]

a GND is a graduated neutral density filter. It is darker on 1/2 and clear on the other. You use it to stop down stuff like skies so you can expose the darker foreground better...

your post processing software (pp) probably has a GND tool. Even Picassa has "graduated tint"...

Using that tool (or a gnd) will balance your sky with your water. Right now, your sky is brighter than the water. Your eye naturally finds the brightest part of the photo and is drawn towards it. If you balance that sky then the impact the reflection in the water has will be more pronounced. You might not totally notice even, until you look at them sequentially. Then you'll notice that the reflection pops a bit more...

keep in mind that if you darken the sky in post, then you'll probably want to bump your highlights again.

the "smidge of pp coule" is just drunk typing...

pp would be post processing, coule would be a misspelled "could"

so it should read, "a nice shot, that, with a smidge of post processing could be more than nice"

[uglymoney]

Thanks. I owe you a beer for the cliff notes. I use an old copy of Adobe PS just because I have it and know it pretty well but I'm fairly sure it can do that. An actual GND filter sounds cool.

[splitter]

Thanks. I owe you a beer for the cliff notes. I use an old copy of Adobe PS just because I have it and know it pretty well but I'm fairly sure it can do that. An actual GND filter sounds cool.

no problem, they are useful filters... sometimes they can be clumsy...

this tree, for example is over darkened by it

[Chainsaw_Willie]

Thanks. I owe you a beer for the cliff notes. I use an old copy of Adobe PS just because I have it and know it pretty well but I'm fairly sure it can do that. An actual GND filter sounds cool.

How old of a copy of Photoshop?

I'm still using PS 5.5 from 1998 and you can definitely do this with it. In fact, I really think the only difference between newer versions of PS and this old version is that the newer versions have simply streamlined and automated a lot of things. That and the newer versions can handle RAW files. I have to convert RAW to 16 bit tiff before I can work on it in PS.

If you want to know how to do this in an old copy of PS, I'd be happy to show you. I'm leaving today for 4 days of camping though so won't be able to get back to it 'til next Monday. The quick explanation is create a selection over the area you want to darken on a new layer, set layer to "soft light" mode, feather the selection so it has a soft edge, fill selection with black, adjust layer opacity to fine tune the effect.

[rot]

Took the afternoon off work, went for a hike. The eagles came out to play:

eagles by Brian.M.K, on Flickr


eagle by Brian.M.K, on Flickr

[Edgnar]

[splitter]

I've been reprocessing a few older shots every once in a while...

At the moment I'm piecing together another show gallery to submit to area displays...

A shot I've posted before, at least in a tr, but with a black and white conversion...

Let me know which you prefer... The black and white intrigues me as a gallery wrap

color




bw

[BeardedClam]

Took the afternoon off work, went for a hike. The eagles came out to play:

eagles by Brian.M.K, on Flickr

That is so amazing to have captured a shot like that. This reminds me of reading the My Side of the Mountain trilogy as a kid and the falcons tale of finding a mate

[SchralphMacchio]

Self portrait in Joshua Tree last Friday morning.

[ex-powderbroker]

My friend buys old photographs from Yard Sales or whatever and scans one a week or so.



lots of view camera stuff, early color, snapshots.

[Edgnar]

^ That lion does not look psyched about water skiing.

[mtcham]

A few from the last couple weeks.


Owl-0204 by jrmorris-mt, on Flickr


Black Bear-Yellowstone NP by jrmorris-mt, on Flickr


Bison-Yellowstone Park by jrmorris-mt, on Flickr


Yellowstone Lake by jrmorris-mt, on Flickr


Standing on water by jrmorris-mt, on Flickr

[uglymoney]

How old of a copy of Photoshop?

I'm still using PS 5.5 from 1998 and you can definitely do this with it. In fact, I really think the only difference between newer versions of PS and this old version is that the newer versions have simply streamlined and automated a lot of things. That and the newer versions can handle RAW files. I have to convert RAW to 16 bit tiff before I can work on it in PS.

If you want to know how to do this in an old copy of PS, I'd be happy to show you. I'm leaving today for 4 days of camping though so won't be able to get back to it 'til next Monday. The quick explanation is create a selection over the area you want to darken on a new layer, set layer to "soft light" mode, feather the selection so it has a soft edge, fill selection with black, adjust layer opacity to fine tune the effect.

Thanks. Not exactly how I did it but it helped.

I didn't have a problem creating that layer at the horizon. Brightened up the water and shoreline to match the sky, gave both layers an exposure correction, contrast boost, and just a touch of extra saturation. Gave it a little tighter crop. Thanks for the advice. I posted the picture in the Atmosphere MPC. P/V forum inhabitants rock!

[FreakofSnow]

Boulder River near Cardwell, MT

[splitter]

rad

Owl-0204 by jrmorris-mt, on Flickr

more revisits... with the wife in china with the camera I wouldn't be surprised if there are even more revisits in the next coupla weeks...

[angry swede]

hello photomags. sunset a few weeks ago in RI, think I went too heavy on the editing leaving the top of the sky so blue.

[advres]

As posted in the MPC, I was told of a new zone so I did a little trespassing and took some pictures.

[splitter]

[Edgnar]

Its not coming out as well on my work monitor as my laptop monitor for some reason. Also, I'm guessing the red spots are dead pixels? Anyway, one of my first attempts at long exposure.

[outabounds]

Its not coming out as well on my work monitor as my laptop monitor for some reason. Also, I'm guessing the red spots are dead pixels? Anyway, one of my first attempts at long exposure.

The shape of your star trails makes it look like you may have had some camera movement. Your focus seems to have been off, too. Good start, though.

[Edgnar]

Yea, focusing in the dark is hard! I was using the bulb setting and had to hold the shutter open b/c I don't have an intervelometer or cable release. Add that to the list I guess. I probably should have used mirror lock up, but I was just seeing what I would get with what I had.

I also don't have live view on my 20D.

[outabounds]

Yea, focusing in the dark is hard! I was using the bulb setting and had to hold the shutter open b/c I don't have an intervelometer or cable release. Add that to the list I guess. I probably should have used mirror lock up, but I was just seeing what I would get with what I had.

I also don't have live view on my 20D.

You'll never get a really sharp night image if you can't take your hand off the camera. I don't know how the Canon works, but on my Nikons I was able to use the little wireless clicker for bulb. One click to open the shutter and another to close it. If your camera can use a wired remote, you can get invervalometer timer remotes on ebay for a little over twenty bucks. You'll get a lot of bang for your buck on that considering how much photography it opens up for you.

For focusing, just put a flashlight about thirty feet away, focus on it and then turn off auto focus. As long as you're using a widish angle lens and stopping down to a 5.6 or so, you'll have the whole thing in decent focus. I think the night focus discussion covered this in greater detail.