Some random clicks
I like this.
quick question, is this thread just for like profestional grade pictures, or is my random snaps of things with my 3.2 megapixyl phone camera acceptable, just for peoples intrest 
Hey Rich you haven't captured the beast known as the A380 on your imaging device yet per chance?
I'd say we are just celebrating the fun of taking photos, giving feedback and suggestions.
alright, maybe one day i will get the motivation to upload the ones from some carshow i went to and show off....small pics, nice cars, what more do you want 
Not yet, If I ever see one I will. I imagine they cruise by at quite a height!
This Mornings sunrise
Theres a town down there somewhere
Some really nice cars i came across during The European Fine Art Fair (TEFAF). Couple of pictures of the nicest cars i've seen.
W12 Pheatons which drove the guests to the Fair.
It's hard to make some proper pictures though, as they're obviously all parked in.
W12 Pheatons which drove the guests to the Fair.
It's hard to make some proper pictures though, as they're obviously all parked in.
What is causing the crazy reflection on the Lambo's headlight unit / Bentley's rear window?
Some shots from my friend's little shop/artist marketing agency opening party. Didn't want to post too many faces on Flickr so here's sample of more anonymous mood shots. Light was nonexistant, ISO 12,800, f2.8 and shutter speeds in 1/30 and 1/15.
That first shot is inspired Spank. Really really like it! 
I'd say the Lambo has some headlight coating causing some funky light refraction, and the Bentley is most probably fitted with some naff aftermarket tint.
That about the Lambo would be right, but i believe the Bentley's got some sort of interlaced windows, or it's just the heating.
I've got a polarizing filter on my camera, which makes the effect of this even more dramatic.
I think it just comes with the more expensive cars as you can see in one of my other pictures of this Drophead, same effect on both the drophead and the Pheaton
Looks like you maybe also bumped up the vibrancy levels?
Some rather random snaps from visitings my co-worker's kite-surfing practise day.
Hope you enjoy!
Hope you enjoy!
Nice pics. Have to ask though, how much do you post-process them?
For all you Canon/Nikon shooters out there: www.canikonforums.com/forums/
Brand new discussion forum, created by the guy who created Pentaxforums.com (one of the best-run and most helpful photo forums I've come across). Has a nice marketplace section and discussion areas for all kinds of C/N gear.
Also I'm a mod there. :o
If anyone's interested, feel free to get in on the ground floor.
Brand new discussion forum, created by the guy who created Pentaxforums.com (one of the best-run and most helpful photo forums I've come across). Has a nice marketplace section and discussion areas for all kinds of C/N gear.
Also I'm a mod there. :o
If anyone's interested, feel free to get in on the ground floor.
Cool, I registered. I hope you accept me in there.
I'm pretty sure it's open registration, so congrats--you're accepted!
Thanks!
Trick question but I say very little.
Now your definition of 'how much' and 'very little' might be different but if I end up with 20-30 usable shots from small shoots and they are often published on the same evening or next day, that isn't much time per image as I do have another day job eating away my life.
99% of my published stuff is edited some way or another. I try to do the fine tuning the crop, contrast curves, saturation and white balance to suit or enhance the emotional content that's in the shots the first place.
I do practically no pixel-based editing at all to my photos (apart from obvious image composites) as I have no PS installed on my home computer. I use LR2 for quick edits and NX2 when colour rendition and detail is critical. Compared side by side the NX2 shows just how bad the Adobe's ACR converter really is. Too bad the NX2 is such a chore to use.
Do some side-by-side comparisons of NX2/ACR!
Just a quick shot from last night, I don't really like it though. Around 60 second exposure in the dead of night, The sky is really grainy even though it was 100ISO, I guess this was just because of the long exposure.
Testing out my new red graduated filter, although the effect on here isn't very nice since the blues clash a bit with the red.
Ok. Doesn't LR2 auto adjust your image colors? It does that to me that's why I don't use it.
No, it's not that simple.
Try it, load a JPG into Lightroom and voilá - your colours do not change.
Loading a RAW into LR (or Bridge/PS as they all use the same ACR converter) first loads the camera-embedded preview image (on which camera histograms are based, some manufacturer displays histograms on RAW data for more accuracy but can't remember which one). Then ACR discards the preview and runs the RAW data through it's converter - this is when you see the dreaded 'my preview looked good and LR ruined it' symptom.
All third-party converters use the same method of discarding the embedded preview and interpreting the RAW data on their own own. Basically guessing what the image and colours might look like. Some converters interpret the data better or worse and often some converters work better on different colours and scenes than other.
The reason for this is that naturally the camera manufacturer wants to keep the upper hand and sell their own converter software by not disclosing their native RAW format details or documentation to third parties. Adobe wants their DNG to become the standard RAW format but so far no luck for them. I'd guess if Adobe allows for encrypted parts within DNG standard for camera manufacturers to insert their engineering-based magic fairy dust data, the DNG will not gain much ground.
Camera Showoff
(5560 posts, started )
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG