Are you ready? It's time for our 14th annual photo contest! Enter your best pictures of the year, for a chance to win a calendar and annual subscription here. Hurry! Deadline for entries is October 21.
Wheeeee. Zoom Blur! My favorite night photography fun shot! This one is amazing! Looking forward to more night shots of the holiday lights.
You mentioned in last thread that you upload photos at up to 2 megs. For viewing on screen, you only need to save at 72 ppi and around 200 kb. If you try to post much larger than that, DG will downsize them for you which sort of freaks me out. I'd rather use Photoshop to downsize since it uses some pretty complex algorithms to minimize jpeg compression and to smooth out the tonal curve. Although, that being said, your photos always look awesome, so maybe I'm fretting for nothing. I just always save for e-mailing and web viewing at around 72 ppi and 100 to 200 kb. I do save a larger TIF at 300 ppi which is around 60 MB for printing and for editing, but only a few of those if I did a lot of work. I'd rather start over with the 9 or so MG RAW file than keep all those TIF hogs.
Patti, all the images I post at DG I resize in PhotoShop, and are either 3 inches tall, or 3 inches wide (that's the max), and 300 dpi jpegs (size ranges from 1.6 to 2MB). That seems to work best, and as far as I can tell they are not resized. I believe the largest image I've ever posted here was maybe 4 MB. And, as far as those TIF hogs go, that's why I have multiple external hard drives ... I archive everything, except the absolute rejects (oh, there are quite a few of those).
I only spent about 40 minutes out at "Christmas Tree Lane" ... it's a very popular place, and even though it's just opened for the season, by 5:30 there were just too many people and too many cars ... and my camera, tripod and I were bound to get knocked over by something sooner or later ... besides, it suddenly got very cold, and my DH needed his dinner (we both needed a glass of wine) ... so, until next time, that's that! I'll case other places in the neighborhood ... there are plenty!
[quote="Jubilada"]Patti, all the images I post at DG I resize in PhotoShop, and are either 3 inches tall, or 3 inches wide (that's the max), and 300 dpi jpegs (size ranges from 1.6 to 2MB). That seems to work best, and as far as I can tell they are not resized. I believe the largest image I've ever posted here was maybe 4 MB. And, as far as those TIF hogs go, that's why I have multiple external hard drives ... I archive everything, except the absolute rejects (oh, there are quite a few of those).[/quote]
Jubi, Try right clicking one of your photos on DG, the photo, not the thumbnail and click on Properties. It will give you the size. You can see that DG has downsized the photo. I think the limit is something like 200 KB, so if you have even just1 KB over their limit (201 if the limit is indeed 200), DG will resize it. You can also right click the image, copy and then paste to your desktop and see if it is the same size as the one you uploaded. It likely will not be. You really only need 72 ppi (also called dpi) for web viewing. Monitors can't resolve any better than that. Now, printing is a different story. Then you need around 240 or 300.
Nuff of that. I need to go look at your photos!!! The fun stuff.
Wheeeeee! Fantastic photos and so much fun to see. I love the zooms - all of 'em. And I have to agree, that partial zoom is way cool - almost looks as if it could be real. The Penguin Joy is awesome. The little guys are adorably cute, but your decorations and the fact that you left the grass and background dark really makes that a fantastic image. Snowman is a cutie.
Great job and I can't wait to see more. I hope to be able to contribute something, but the weather for the weekend is supposed to be rainy. That would actually be good for night shots because of the reflections in the water, but my old bones and joints don't like that wet cold.
Actually, Patti, I did almost exactly what you suggested, to see if my photo had been downsized, but rather than copy the image to my desktop I saved it to my disk ... that saved image in PhotoShop, it was exactly the same size as the one I saved and posted ... but here's my scientific observation, and I don't know what the significance might be ... for instance, when I view the picture above, "More Christmas Tree Lane," on my computer, using the Windows filmstrip directoty option, it says that picture is 284 KB, the same thing the info says after its posted on DG (which I verified by right-clicking, etc); when I go to open the picture in PhotoShop, at the directory level, it tells me the picture is 247.8 KB, but when the picture is open in PhotoShop the picture size is listed as 1.66 MB ... now, someone might have to explain the reasons for those discrepancies to me ...
[quote="Jubilada"]Actually, Patti, I did almost exactly what you suggested, to see if my photo had been downsized, but rather than copy the image to my desktop I saved it to my disk ... that saved image in PhotoShop, it was exactly the same size as the one I saved and posted ... but here's my scientific observation, and I don't know what the significance might be ... for instance, when I view the picture above, "More Christmas Tree Lane," on my computer, using the Windows filmstrip directoty option, it says that picture is 284 KB, the same thing the info says after its posted on DG (which I verified by right-clicking, etc); when I go to open the picture in PhotoShop, at the directory level, it tells me the picture is 247.8 KB, but when the picture is open in PhotoShop the picture size is listed as 1.66 MB ... now, someone might have to explain the reasons for those discrepancies to me ...
edit: our comments crossed in cyberspace!
This message was edited Dec 13, 2011 5:09 PM[/quote]
Where are you seeing the 1.66 MB? If you are seeing it in either the lower left corner of your image under the Document Size dropdown or if you are seeing it in the Image Size dialog box at the very top where it says, "Pixel Dimensions", that isn't really the size of the jpeg file. That is (for some really strange reason that I don't understand) an estimation of what the size of the document would be in megabytes (MB) if it were saved as an uncompressed file (TIF, for example). If you use, File > Save As and pick JPEG, then the dialog box will tell you the actual size that you will be saving the photo depending on what quality you use. It will be a lot less because of the compression. When I copy your "More Christmas Tree Lane" photo to my desktop and look at it in Photoshop, I see the 1.66M which is just an estimation as above. When I do a File > Save As and pick JPEG, it will range from around 60 to 450 KB with around 150 KB for a medium compression (5).
Here's where I see the 1.66 MB ... and that's an estimation? So if I saved it as a TIFF file it would truly be 1.66MB? But as a JPEG it's really only 284 KB. Honestly, I don't understand this ... I do use, incidentally, the maximum resolution JPEG (12) ...
Whoosh! Jubilada, I'm liking every one of those -- even the screen shot! There's so much fun in them. So much dancing light! I'm hearing Bing singing "White Christmas" in the other room right now and looking at these and it's just great!
My offerings for tonight aren't the least bit Christmassy...it was a beautiful day out and the clouds were so interesting. When I started looking at my pictures later, they really fell short of what I actually saw out there so I ended up "playing" with them.
[quote="Jubilada"]Here's where I see the 1.66 MB ... and that's an estimation? So if I saved it as a TIFF file it would truly be 1.66MB? But as a JPEG it's really only 284 KB. Honestly, I don't understand this ... I do use, incidentally, the maximum resolution JPEG (12) ...[/quote]
Yep. That's close to what it would be as a TIF. To know the file size, you just do a right click and Properties and that's the file size. Or look in the detailed list in the folder where you have it and the file size will be there too. Don't feel alone. I don't understand it either. It doesn't make any sense.
Miss Mary, Very cool stuff! Ditto what Jubilada said. I'm loving those clouds! I think there's an escalator to the pearly gates in that shot. Interesting pattern in #2 and that last one is so wild with the star and the rays streaking out. Very artistic!
Well, this picture was taken looking.straight up. I've seen two "pictures" in those clouds. What do you see? Patti, I'll be looking forward to what you come up with. You tend to see things when I don't.
Oh, Miss Mary, what fun! I love to look at clouds and find hidden objects. I am a little bit concerned about that teddy bear. What is he going to do with that poor little yellow duck? I hope he's rescuing it from the coyote over there on the left. (No, I don't really see a coyote. ^_^ )
Miss Mary, the tree is a Grand Fir, and it's from southern Washington State ... the aroma is delightful and fills the house. The cats are beside themselves, and Consuelo insists on ingesting those needles and then throwing them up ... ugh! (Actually, she's kind of getting over that by now, thank heavens!)
Didn't have time to finish any of my photo projects since I've spent so much time training my replacement at work. I'll have lots of time starting in January, so maybe I can make a 2013 calendar.
Thanks to MIss Mary, I did have time to do a quick ( took about 5 minutes) Christmas card using the Picture Collage Maker software. Sending it to family today by e-mail. Normally I take a special photo, spend hours editing it, have it printed and snail mail it out. Not going to happen this year.
Thanks Miss Mary. While I was looking for photos to put in the card, I ran across this little Carolina Wren. They are just so cute. Not the greatest perch - it's the upright support on the back of an old, old chair. Wish it could have been natural, but I take what I can get.
FotoSketcher Oil blended back with original, framed and attempt to color correct. Not sure if the colors are correct or not. My eyes are not calibrated. ^_^
Oh, that perch is just wonderful, I think. The aged wood is just great! I think those birds are nice, too, and I love their call. I've never been able to get one to sit still for me long enough to snap a picture, though.
A Snowy Egret in flight. I overexposed the whites of the bird. This could have been such a good photo with all of the foliage reflecting in the water and the Snowy's reflection. Rookie mistake, but I like it anyway.
This is actually a White Ibis. But, I call them Frank Sinatra birds. I did a Pixel Bender oil on this and then masked out the PB treatment from the eye so it is the original photo of the eye. Then I toned down the greens and yellows so that dratted marsh grass in the background wouldn't show up. He was strolling back and forth in that marsh grass right in front of me - probably about 10 feet away. I had a perfect shot, but he wouldn't get out of that darn grass. This is where it was the least grass, but still ...
I had several shots of Butter Butts ... uhhh, I mean Myrtle Warblers. But the Eastern Bluebirds were few and far between. I got a whole bunch of underexposed and/or blurry shots of them, but at least this and one other fairly decent shot.
I did so much to this image I don't remember it all. Not too happy with the colors in the gradient background, but too tired to play with it anymore.
Not many wildlife shots from me ... but I did catch a couple of this rotten little squirrel through my living room window (you'll notice it is my tendency to UNDERexpose, which I hear is harder to "fix" because of the inherent "noise" ... did the best I could) ...
Jubilada, Wow! Three fantastic photos and treatments. They just kept getting better. I'm with you on underexposing. I do it too because if you overexpose (as in my Egret), you have nothing - no data at all. At least you can deal with noise. I do try to get the exposure correct by checking the histogram, but sometimes I just don't have time before the opportunity is gone.
Your little squirrels are adorable and the presentation is outstanding. The frame colors match the leaf colors! How cool is that!!!
Both Christmas trees are beautiful images to start with. The exposure (HDR?) on the first is so perfect. The room is just beautiful and you have captured it with a wonderful warm glow with all of the lamps and lights perfectly exposed. I love the PB oil treatment - subtle, and very effective. What a joy to see.
I keep going back and forth between the first and the second tree, unable to pick a favorite. They are so different and so beautiful. I love the illusion of snow in the second. Surely it is not snowing in Lytton Plaza, but my brain thinks it is. Great job!
Final crop - probably pushed as far as I can go. I really like this lens. It's the Canon 400mm f5.6. Not too expensive, not too big and very sharp. I did some noise removal and sharpening on this one and some serious twig and branch pruning.
Well, Patti, that's such a fine sampling! The last bird (Mocker?) is just darling! Wonderful job of branch / twig removal. I can't believe how much cropping you were able to do on that Heron. Well, I guess seeing is believing! There's lots of detail, even in the totally uncropped picture.
Jubilada, I'm loving that last tree of yours! Wow, the whole picture is full of sparkle and fun and, as Patti said, snow! It's such a festive piece -- now if I could just open that card and read the sentiment inside...!
Patti, that's some lens ok ... whew! Sharp it is! Very impressive! However, I wouldn't call it inexpensive (at least for my budget) ... something I will probably never get, because if I get the 24-105 f4 L, that will probably be it for a while ...
Those two tree shots were highly manipulated, and since I ventured out of my ISO safety zone, pretty noisy, too, so I had to do a lot of tweaking in RAW ... no HDR, and the camera was my little G10 ... I thought the Pixel Bender Oil treatment gave a nice kind of "snowy" effect to the Lytton Plaza one ... and, yes, it was not snowing (too bad for California, because there's been very little snow at all).
Woo-hoo! Lovely composites, Jubilada, but that last one is my favorite. It's festive, lighthearted and fun! I see Christmas and Winter and I somehow even see a little Native American design going on. That's so nice!
A friend made me this for Christmas...and I made a greeting out of a photo of it:
The composites are so nicely done! I love the complementary backgrounds you chose - such an elegant BG for the elegant Opera House images and the sandstone BG with the light and dark sand colors for Mr. Jonathon Livingstone. The Winter Solstice "wreath" is so beautiful!
You have created a magnificent and stunning image! I love the brown tones and lovely glow. I am sure your friend will be thrilled to see how the gift has inspired you to such creativity. Wow!
Awwwwe. So cute! I think the kitties are waiting for Santa. The photo of Consuelo is wonderful! Fantastic catch with lovely pose, soft light and perfectly balanced with kitty in foreground looking left and tree in left background! Love that photo!!!
I went to a photography lecture at Edith L. Moore Nature Sanctuary. It was only an hour or so before sunset and so overcast that I didn't get any good photos, but I did discover that severe noise removal results in a sort of painterly look. It removed all the feather detail in this lady Cardinal and further blurred the already oof background.
All I did was normal tweaks to white balance, exposure, etc in Adobe Camera Raw and then I cranked both the luminance and color noise reduction sliders to the max positions. All of the speckles of color noise were removed, the graininess of the luminance noise was mostly removed and with it went the feather detail.
Then I removed a sunflower hull and added a frame. Nothing else.
f5.6 1/400 and ISO 12,800 ... YES, ISO 12,800! I already had the largest aperture, so the only way I could get at least 1/400 which I needed to handhold without camera shake, was to boost the ISO to the max.
I never did get any real keeper shots at the ELMNS, but I did get this one I thought was interesting. I sneaked up on this squirrel and was all ready to take my shot when he discovered me. I did get one shot off before he moved, but this is the one I kept. Again, I just did the usual tweaks in ACR and did a little extra sharpening on the eye and removed a distracting blade of grass, but that fur blur is all thanks to Mr. Squirrel. Added a stroke.
Oh my gosh!!! I've seen a lot of incredible time-lapse sequences and the ones with the racks that smoothly move the camera. But, HDR! Wow. That's totally awesome. Thanks for that link, Jubilada! My mind is reeling with the possibilities.
An American Robin
I was standing on the trail watching him forage through the leaves at the edge of the trail on the other side of the little bridge. I took a few photos and my shutter click got his attention but didn't seem to bother him. So, I squatted down to get a better angle and he started hopping over toward me. He crossed over the bridge and kept getting closer and closer tilting his head back and forth as if to say, "What the heck are you?" What a cutie.
I did a mild PIxel Bender oil on the background, masking it out of foreground and bird. Then just a simple frame.
Cute Hippo Card!!! The Ho Ho Ho Hum sure fits his pose.
Oh, that hippo reminds me of another project that never got done. At one time I was planning to do an animated Christmas card with the "All I want for Christmas is a Hippopotamus" song (the original version found courtesy of Miss Mary). But, I never got a decent photo of a hippo.
Now, that's an outside the box Christmas tree. Very cool.
Those are swell kitty pics ... but not only does she probably have all that equipment, those kitties have been trained to be malleable, and to sit still ... my cats would never stand for any of that for one second! I'm lucky I get any shots of them at all!
And I really like the ones you get - all natural, candid photos of kitties doing what kitties do, not what people want kitties to do. We had a dog that would pose for us - such a sweetie. But I still liked the candid shots of him better.There's usually a story that goes with the candid ones. Not so much for the posed ones.
Patti, your birds are so nice! I like that Robin story, too. It really does have a questioning look on its face! And that hie-tailing squirrel! They really do have liquid movement, don't they? Your picture really captures that well.
Jubilada, that shot of Consuelo is excellent! I don't think I could add to Patti's comments and I agree with them whole-heartedly. I'm really taken with that shot! That Ho-Ho-Hippo makes quite a statement, doesn't she?
Patti, I'd forgotten all about you making a card out of that song. The folks who live in the house with the Hippo in the yard really should be playing it!
Very nice pics, everyone. I'm rather limited as to what I can do with my photo program, which is Paint Shop Pro 8 (can't afford Photoshop). I just don't understand how to do a lot of the different things that I see other people doing, and I don't have much time to teach myself. I wish I could take classes and learn all this stuff. I so enjoy working with my photos.
Patti, I love the Christmas e-card you designed, and nice that it was so quick and easy. Personally I prefer snail mail with real cards for Christmas. So much more personal. I send out a Christmas letter every year with photos I've taken throughout that year. It's usually 8 pages long, but I print on both sides of the paper, so it's 4 pages. I print on good quality brochure paper. I'm quite happy with the way it comes out.
Patti, I also love the cropping you did on the heron shot. Did you use an edge preserving smooth on that one? I've done that a number of times of shots that I really liked, and I love the effect it gives. Makes them look like paintings, though I have to downsize them to 2048 x 1536 pixels to get the effect I want. The file size is 568K in JPEG.
Love the fur blur on the squirrel!
I wish I could do some of those zoom shots. I have a compact camera, so I don't think it can be done with those. I just bought the Olympus SP 810-UZ with the 36x wide optical zoom, the longest zoom of any compact camera, or so I've read. I'm really enjoying it. My last camera, a Fuji Finepix S2000HD, had a 15x wide optical zoom. It did take a lot of great pics, though.
I love your last 2 shots, Miss Mary. How fun!
Here is a shot that I used the edge preserving smooth on. First the original, which measures 3648 x 2736 pixels.
What adorable holiday greetings! Your bird sentry is wonderful!! I love it. The snow is lovely.
Welcome and thanks for the comments. Your photo has the most beautiful fall display of colors I've ever seen. Wow.
What I did on the heron image is similar to the "edge preserving smooth" in PSP. The smooth part was achieved by cropping down so severely. I just lost a lot of pixels, so the remaining ones were smoothed by upsizing the image back to a reasonable size to display (from 4896 on long side out of camera cropped down to 767 on long side and then upsized to 900 on long side. When Photoshop upsizes, it finds pixels on either side of the new ones it will add and approximates what the new ones should look like which results in a smoothing effect. Then, I applied a sharpening effect. Most sharpening commands sharpen by finding the edges and adding contrast to the edge. So, it is, in a way, the same.
Congrats on the new camera! That sounds like a fantastic camera for shooting nature. I had the first Olympus UZ camera made and loved it. It was my very first digital camera before they even came out with digital SLRs. You have to post some photos taken with the magic filter. I've read about it and it supposedly does reflections and other cool effects right in the camera? Sounds like lots of fun.
Like Patti, I am blown away by the colors of your Fall foliage...I'd have felt like I was walking into a beautiful dream if I was there to experience it in person!
I, too, started out with PSP and still use it. I also have Photoshop Essentials 9, a much, much less expensive version of Photoshop. It is quite scaled down as well, but offers me most of what I need (and more). There's also a freebie that Google offers called Picnik (http://www.Picnik.com). It has a number of things to offer and it's not something you have to install on your computer. You can upload your photo and begin working on it, using basic editing tools like exposure correction, cropping, straightening, etc. Then there are some nice special effects that you can play with as well. They do dangle some goodies before your eyes that can be had by subscribing to their premium package but I have successfully resisted the temptation...
You have achieved a nice, subtle smoothing effect in the shot of you and your father. I like that picture.
Miss Mary, "Keeping Watch" is just darling ... and I love the "additions" to your springtime picture that bring it right into the holiday spirit!
Welcome, Karen ... I echo what Patti and Miss Mary say about your lovely fall color shots. You'll have great fun with your new camera, I'm sure. As far as the photo-editing part, well, that just takes lots of time and practice and experimentation ... it all falls together after a while, and sometimes a longer while than you might imagine, but you gather so much information along the way ... !
Here's my back yard flamingo, puppet-warped a little, after being selected, then graduated background, and the hat I got at Piknic ... Merry Merry everyone !
Thanks for the welcome, guys. And thanks for the compliments on the fall foliage shots. Fall in New England is so beautiful, and few places can compare. Those photos I posted were taken on the Beech Forest Trail in the Cape Cod National Seashore, over by Provincetown, at the tip of the Cape, about 2 hours from me. I have only been there twice (though to P-town itself several times). It's really gorgeous in the fall with all the beech trees and oaks.
Patti, I have seen fall in TX, too, and there are some beautiful areas there. I have a sister and nephew who live in Gatesville, near the Hill Country. Beautiful countryside over there. I love it. I've been there several times now.
Patti, thanks for the links. I will have to check them out as soon as I have a chance. Working 60 hrs a wk and helping out my elderly father takes up much of my time. Also playing on FB and checking out and chatting with all the wonderful friends I've made on DG takes up a lot of time, too. Then in spring and summer and fall I do a lot of gardening, and I have more gardens than I really have time for. Would love to find more time for playing with my photos. Have not really had a chance to play with the magic filter on my new Olympus yet, but will post some pics when I do. I've tried the burst mode for continuous shots for action, and that's a fun one to get action shots of my dogs. Only thing I don't like is the fact that I can't get the better quality shots in that mode. Well, the quality depends on which mode I use. At the fastest of 30 frames per second, the pics will be 2M or lower. At 18 frames per second it's 3M or lower. At the little bit slower speed (doesn't specify how many frames per second) it's 5M or lower. At a bit slower than that (also doesn't specify how many frames per second) it doesn't state what the image quality will be, only that it will be lower than the highest quality, which is 14M.
I love your Christmas flamingo, Jubilada! Fun!
I'll post a few more pics I've played with in the past.
Karen, you have a good eye for collage arrangements. You really do have a lot on your plate, don't you? I suppose DG is good therapy for you -- I know it has been for me.
One more from me tonight. I went outside today and found this rose blooming. That's quite unusual, as our temps have been as low as the 20s, 30s and 40s quite a bit over the last month or so. Anyhow, it is my Christmas rose and, with it, I bid you all glad tidings and warm blessings. Merry Christmas.
Well, Karen, you are certainly one busy person, and how you get it all done I'll never know ... makes me tired just thinking of it. And my, oh, my, you do do those collages! That one with your niece is especially charming!
Miss Mary, what a lovely winter rose!
Couldn't help but do a globe from some of the Christmas lights around our neighborhood ... we took another walk down Christmas Tree Lane for Christmas Eve, this time it was very dark (and cold!), and I cranked up the old ISO to 800. Thank heavens Photoshop RAW does such a good job with that noise.
Jubilada, your collage globe box is a cut above -- no, more than a mere cut above! Words fail me. That is so absolutely fantastic, I don't know what to say...but, as usual, I won't let that stop me. I am awe-stricken by all the shadows and light, placed just right for a realistic effect. The satin finish on the globe adds such finesse! The photos themselves lack for nothing in the way of beauty and the composite effect is amazing. I want to walk onto that stage, stand beside that huge globe and be a kid again! It is an enchanted wonderland...
I couldn't wait to get to my computer to see your masterpiece. I couldn't open it on my iPhone, but I could read Miss Mary's words. I can't say it any better. I feel as if I can reach into the monitor and pull out that globe and hang it on my tree. And, I just wish I really could. It looks so real! Awesome!
Francisco looks adorable. That is such a sweet photo - rates a solid 10 on the Awwwwe Meter. I want to go right out and adopt a kitty that I can spoil. ^_^
I love what you did to the moon photo. Wonderful color in the sky and in the frame. And, yes, I checked my SkyGazer software and that is Venus. As a matter of fact, at that time, Neptune is in the sky on the other side of the moon about the same distance as Venus. I think it will probably be too faint to see with your lens though?
For some reason, when I look at the photo, my head keeps trying to turn and see those branches as trees, so I gave it a spin to see what it would look like. Interesting.
EDIT: Eeeek. My computer changed the color. Ah, I see. It saved as my default colorspace which is one of the sRGB colorspaces and not Adobe RGB as your original. Sorry about that.
Patti, your "spin" is, of course, interesting ... however, my intention was, well, as you see it ... with the branches to the side, as I saw it ...
And, while we're on the subject, can you tell me why I might want to change my default color space ...? I've always just gone along with what my computer does, and I think I should be better educated on the matter ... although, in terms of printing and such, I've generally been satisfied with my results ... some of your words of wisdom ...?
Managing color makes my head hurt. I keep it very simple and hope for the best. I always use a default profile of sRGB which is denoted as sRGB IEC61966-2.1 in PS.
I never use Adobe for the web. For some browsers, you can't tell the difference, but I still use IE and it makes a huge difference. When I look at your photo in Adobe RGB, the colors look different than in sRGB. I don't know if you see the difference or not. I think Safari and some of the other browsers compensate so no difference is seen.
Supposedly, Adobe RGB is better for printing, but the places where I get prints done (both professional labs and the local drugstore) all require sRGB, so that's what I use.
Another thing I do is set my camera on sRGB because the image on the LCD will look better since it is in sRGB. However, if for any reason I shoot jpegs (never have in years), then I switch to Adobe RGB in the camera since it will capture a wider gamut of colors and I hate the thought of missing out on any colors in the capture. If you are shooting RAW, the camera doesn't convert to an colorspace and save everything, so that's why I am okay with choosing sRGB. It only makes a difference on the LCD screen. The histogram will look different too and you have better control of knowing when you are clipping when you view the image histogram in sRGB. Try it some time. Put cam on tripod. Shoot a scene with camera in aRGB and then switch to sRGB and shoot again. Compare the histograms. The aRGB will be stretched out looking.
Thanks, Patti, more stuff to make my head swim ... I will check out those links, and will think "seriously" about changing things around ... although, I've been pretty satisfied with my results thus far and my browser (Mozilla) shows my pictures true to what I see on my monitor and what comes out of my printer ... oh, always so much stuff to consider ...
If it ain't broke, don't fix it! I think most people, especially professionals, do exactly what you are doing.
If your prints match what is on your monitor, you are set. I wish I could say as much. That's why I no longer print. I never could get it to match. I use Gretag Macbeth to calibrate my monitor, so I know it's right, but I never could get the printer to match. I even went so far as to order some very expensive paper and custom made drivers for that paper and my printer. Still didn't match. Threw the darn thing away.
If I really want a good print, I order from Exposure Manager and they do a good job. Doesn't always match perfectly, but very close. If I just want a 5 x 7 "stick it on the bulletin board for a while" print, I just use the local drugstore.
Jubilada, I like that Sycamore Sun. You really did a good job with the contrast (the lights and darks complement each other nicely!) and the detail. Really cool!
I've been going through some old pictures. This one really brought back memories. My father and I were digging the car out of what remains Memphis' biggest December snow on record. It was 1963 and it got down to -13°... I was wearing many layers of clothing, including at least one pair of gloves, which were covered with plastic bags. I don't think we should comment on who was doing most of the work!
Well, I made it. Got everything done at work yesterday, gathered my meager belongings and passed the baton over to the "new guy". I have officially joined the ranks of the "jubilada." I look forward to spending a lot of quality time with my camera. Went out Thursday and bought a tent, nice thick sleeping pad, lantern and State Park Pass. Critters, here I come.
I love your tree with the sun! Excellent composition and cool frame. All of the flowers were so nice to see. So blah around here. I really like your OOB technique on the Cyclamen and Paper Whites. That is a very cool way to isolate the flowers from a busy background and focus attention on the subject! And my favorite is the rose image. It is just beautifully done - lovely colors and a nice simple image with no distractions. Also like all of the water drops (dew, I guess).
Oh, my! -13!!! I can't even imagine. You did a great job on the photo. It reminds me of some of the old B&W lithographs.
Congrats, Patti! That's wonderful! I know you are excited about the prospect of spending more time with your camera and I'm happy for you. I am looking forward to seeing lots of goodies for sure!
Jubilada, I was surprised that I still recall enough Spanish to understand your words to Patti. Never took it in school, but had friends from Honduras, Nicaragua and Cuba through the years. I guess some of what I learned from them stuck! You are absolutely right about youth -- only a kid would be smiling in below-zero weather. I was probably so happy about all that snow that I didn't even notice the cold!
TAR, I'm mighty glad you "found" us and will be looking forward to seeing some more of your work, too!
A lot of great pics, you guys. I especially like the rose. You all know so much more about photo editing than I do. And I have so little time to learn. Guess I'll just have to admire all your works for now. Happy New Year!
A New Year's Rose (a mini rose ... and that bug looked like a speck to my naked eye, I suppose it's an aphid) ... much manipulation, including pixel bender and layers and blending modes ... la vie en rose ... the new year begins ... sigh ...
Thanks, Ladies ... and I suppose that's not an aphid (wrong color, I think), but that rose is only 1 inch across, and that bug really did look just like a teeny speck to me ... didn't realize that it WAS a bug until I loaded the picture onto my computer!
Wow! Jubilada, You are in creative mode. That Mushroom and Calendula image is beautiful. The gold and brown tones fit so well together and your framing looks great! And, I don't know how you do those kaleidos, but I sure like looking at them. The black ring on this one appears to tuck under the lower layer at the edge points (if that makes any sense) and it looks so 3D!
I have been running all over the place to take photos, so haven't spent much time processing. I'll do that on a rainy day. ^_^ But, I did do a little bit to a few.
Went all the way out to the end of the Texas City dike (almost 5 miles) to get some sunrise photos of the lighthouse across the Bay. It was so cold, my hands hurt after about 10 minutes. And the wind was blowing so hard, I had to crank the shutter speed way up because my tripod couldn't hold the camera still. Tough shooting. All of the lighthouse photos were too blurry. I shot it first and then ... duh ... didn't go back and reshoot it after I realized I needed a faster shutter speed.
I did get an almost sharp photo of one of the ships in the ship channel. The three blurry birds behind the ship are real. The others were added using a bird silhouette Photoshop brush.
And the Vermillion Flycatcher. What a beautiful little bird. I've found that if I just sit still, many types of birds will eventually get closer and closer to try to figure out what I am. This one was flitting all over the place and he would flit closer and closer.
It was very bright outside and I got this one right before I was heading home, so not the best time of day. And, sure enough, my camera blew out the red channel. It's just like trying to get a shot of a bright red rose on a bright, sunny day. It can't be done. I sent this one to my photography teacher and asked what I should have done differently. She said you can try to shoot 1 stop underexposed to keep some feather detail. But, what she said you really have to do is not shoot bright red birds on bright sunny days. Well, darn. Guess I'll go out on the next overcast day and see if he's still there.
Well, Patti, the ship in the sunrise is simply gorgeous ... very much like an impressionistic painting ... and you could have fooled me with those bird "brushes" ... and in fact, if you hadn't mentioned the three "blurry birds" I'd never have noticed them!
The white-throated sparrow is precious, what darling bird, and what a lovely shot! (Nice treatment, too!)
AND, that spicy little Vermillion Flycatcher ... whew, what a beautiful little bird, and I think your shot is great! Red is such a difficult color to capture!
Patti, lovely shots! You really rescued the red in the Flycatcher! I'm glad you threw caution to the wind (no pun intended!), broke all the rules and went for that one! I'm in love with that sunrise as well. Wow, just breathtaking...
Jubilada, that kaleido really is fun! The offset in the leaf veining creates such a playful effect. The thumbnail looks like a wintergreen snowflake and I like that, too!
Well, I really went out in a different direction with this one. I found this old picture of the house my family lived in when I was born. The picture was taken 13 years before I came on the scene and that qualifies it as an antique several times over! It was pretty scratched and spotted and, even though I spent a good bit of time dealing with all of that, it failed to satisfy me.
Striking image! I love the framing and the high contrast edges. Perfect image for this! I would love to know if the house is still there and what a photograph from the same viewpoint would look like today. I'll bet that little bitty tree is now huge. I would also love to see more of that car. Any idea what kind it is?
My Mom drove a Model A Ford. And so far, I have not found one photo of it. :(
I love it, Jubilada -- that camera is great! And the old photo, too. Your father was a handsome man and that treatment is just right to showcase him and his car! I love old stuff. I could just sit and look through anybody's old photos and have a blast!
Miss Mary, I hope you find the house. That would be cool. You have inspired me as well. I plan to dig out some of my old family photos that were taken in Galveston, go back to the place they were taken and take a similar view of the area. I think my family might enjoy seeing the comparison.
Jubilada, That is a fine photo of your father! I can't help thinking it had to be by a professional photographer with the pose and quality. Or maybe you inherited that photographer's eye from a family member that took the photo.
Well, your mother demonstrated your artistic eye for photography in that shot, Jubilada. All the photos my family members took are totally static - people standing square to the camera, hands hanging down. Very boring. Hope you find some film that will work and a lab that will process it. I wonder if the photos will look like the Holga type photos people do in Photoshop.
I've worked a bit more on the sunrise shots. This is another ship photo. Real bird. Just added the stroke frame.
Composite of birds at the State Park. Background is way too busy on a couple of them. I didn't really notice until I was almost done and I didn't save the psd file with the layers, so I can't change them out. When will I learn???
Going counterclockwise and starting in upper left corner, birds are Pied-billed Grebe, Vermillion Flycatcher,Gadwall, Northern Cardinal, Snowy Egret, American Coot and Little Blue Heron.
Edit: Correct ID. Incorrectly Identified the Gadwall as a Wigeon.
Patti, that "Leaving Port" sunrise shot is incredible! You got the bird in there, and I can even see the engine steam coming out of the boat's smokestack ... and that sun, oh, my, oh, my ... spectacular ... !
This last one is somewhat graphic, so don't click on the thumbnail if it might bother you and stop reading now. I spotted this one Coot (#1) that seemed to be sitting higher in the water than the others and another one (#2) was hovering near it. While I was looking at it, the water underneath the Coot started moving. I thought one of the resident Alligators might have him, but that wasn't the case. He was actually standing on another Coot (#3), presumably trying to drown it.
Whenever #3 would try to stick his head out, #1 would bite his neck and force his head back under water. I watched this little scenario for around 10 minutes, snapping a few shots. No telling how long it had been going on before I started watching. Finally I got the idea of trying to get some video, but by the time I got my camera set up for video, it was all over. I never did see #3 again, but 1 and 2 were swimming around as if nothing happened.
Patti, those sunrise shots are so stirring...I can almost hear that sun coming up as the day begins to take hold. As for that birdie collage -- just great! Oh, that's so sweet! You have them arranged just right, too.
Jubilada, I like your treatment on the moon shot. It looks like it's on a pottery wheel. You really do marry your moons and branches with a special touch!
My Camellia seems to be sporting blooms that are a little lighter in color this year. Maybe that's just my imagination -- no matter, though. A bloom of any color is more than welcome around here this time of year!
Jubilada, Thanks for the encouraging words. That was a spectacular sunrise! Glad to know I'm not the only one way too quick on that flatten/save move. ^_^.
Your "misty moon" image is so lovely and so creative. I love the placement of the moon in the branches - perfect timing to get that one. And the concentric circles extending beyond the canvas, well, that is icing on the cake. Wow!
Miss Mary, That Camellia does look to be a lighter color than I remember. I thought yours were similar to mine and mine are a darker color. In any case, that is a beautiful color and a perfect specimen. Glad you still have some color. I think it must be getting quite cold up that direction.
[quote="P_Edens"]All the photos my family members took are totally static - people standing square to the camera, hands hanging down. Very boring. [/quote]
Well, I must note that, at the time this photo was taken, my parents were recently married. At that point in time, my mother adored my father, and he was a bit of a "ham" and loved posing for pictures. Each of them considered themselves "artistic." Those elements contribute to an interesting shot.
Miss Mary, please forgive me, I neglected to comment on your gorgeous Camellia! It is a stunner, whatever the shade! (I got caught up with sunsets and drowning birds ... tsk) ...
My little old Peace Lily is blooming ... this is two shots merged so each bloom is in focus (more or less), frame added ... (yes, I know it's absolutely screaming for some kind of clever caption ... but one escapes me! It's up to you guys!)
The moon was really pretty this afternoon, as the sun was sinking low and the clouds were drifting in. I kept thinking how well you'd have been able to capture it, Jubilada. You have such a knack for moons...
Miss Mary, I agree with Jubilada. That is a wonderful moon capture and a wonderful presentation, too.
There should be another good moon photo op this evening since it will be rising when the sun is setting. Probably need a tripod. And then tomorrow, the photo op will be in the early morning. The full moon will be setting while the sun is rising.
My favorite moon photography times are whem you can get the moon in a twilight sky.
I was playing with a Vermillion Flycatcher image and ended up with this. I know. No resemblance. This is the Stereographic filter in Pixel Bender.
And speaking of last night's moon, here's a comparison picture (it should be fairly self-explanatory), which (I think) demonstrates what a difference shutter speed can make! Sadly, there are "horizon" issues where I live, and can't get a true rising moon shot ... or setting sun shot for that matter ...
You did it again. You put your creative twist to that filter with the moon in the center. That is so cool! To be honest, I didn't know there was a stereographic filter either. Did it just appear with the last Adobe upgrade? I don't know, but I don't remember downloading or installing it. I was just going down the list and playing with them all and thought it was fun.
That is an interesting comparison. I would expect the moon to be a bit less sharp since it moves and we move so a faster shutter speed will stop the action. I try to never shoot it at less then 1/200 with my 400mm lens. With a wider angle, you can get away with slower. And I would expect it to be brighter at the slower shutter speed unless the ISO changed. But the beautiful blue sky vs the muddy gray sky and the yellow tinge to the moon! I don't know why that happened. It's like the white balance changed for some reason. Did you have it on AWB (auto white balance)? And did the ISO stay the same?
Patti, unless I'm mistaken (and that's entirely possible), going from 1/160 a second to 1/80 is actually more than "one stop." Nevertheless, the results are obvious (at least to me) ... is it my lens? my camera? who knows?
Here's something that's kind of strange ... using a Pixel Bender filter not really meant for CS5 Photoshop ... lots of manipulation, and the result is a kaleido that's a wee bit off, but interesting, nevertheless ... Peace Lily Redux ...
Jubilada, The newest PB one does remind me of one of those optical illusion images. As Miss Mary said, if you stare into it for a few seconds, it does seem 3D and as if it is moving. Very cool.
Okay, I'm busted. You are right about the number of stops. It is actually 1 and 1/3 stop. The progression in thirds of a stop is:
1/160 to 1/125 to 1/100 and then to 1/60. So close to 4/3 stops or 1 and 1/3. ? I think.
But still, that is a huge change in white balance. Very interesting to me. This is something that I just don't know about and I can't stand it. I'll have to ask my photography teacher and see if she has a clue. Thanks for posting it. I love trying to figure out why strange things happen. I went out to try to duplicate last night, but it was just too cloudy and overcast. We've been having heavy fog in the am and misty cloudy skies at night. Ick.
Jubilada, Thanks for the link. Some very cool stuff there. I have it bookmarked to go back and watch some of the tutorials. I really had to think hard about that e-book on trick photography techniques. If it wasn't so expensive, I'd get it, but $100 is a bit steep for me.
I did ask Kathy Clark about your two photos being so different. She said the extra time will make a difference in the white balance. The longer time will allow a more realistic rendition of the colors, so that makes sense. She also said (which I'm sure you already know) that if you want to see the blue sky in the second one, clicking the white balance dropper (in the levels or curves tool) and then clicking on the moon should make the sky blue.
I plan to spend a lot of time playing with this whenever we get some clear night skies and it's not freezing cold outside.
I'm glad to hear what your teacher had to say ... it makes sense to me, as that's what I thought was happening. And actually, I wanted the sky to be that color, because that's the color it was ... if that makes sense ... and I did several shots starting out at 1/160 and then 1/125, etc., and with each one I noticed a slight difference ... I stopped at 1/80 because I figured that's as slow as I could go hand holding the camera (which I was) without risking camera shake ... I suspect that if I'd had the tripod out there I could have gotten exactly the colors I saw at a little bit slower, maybe 1/60 or 1/50 ... who knows ... but then I bet I'd lose definition in the moon ... ack.
Anyhow, here's a left-over Christmas ornament I spied on my walk this morning ... wanted to catch a star burst, which I did at f22 ... if you look closely you can see my reflection in the globe ...
That was a very interesting lesson for me. I just didn't think it could possibly matter that much. Wow. As much night shooting as I've done, I should have known that.
^_^ Very cool f22 starburst! And cute froggy fountain. I like that pattern on the Kale image.
My walk this morning was on my treadmill. Got a tad over 3 inches of rain at our house that started sometime during the night and didn't let up until early afternoon . The guys that programmed our weather station have a sense of humor. This is what it said during the worst of the downpour (see at the bottom right above where it says Vantage Pro 2):
Edit: I really should proofread what I write before I push the submit button.
Patti, I believe you are sending your rain to me tomorrow. At least that's what the weatherman said.
Jubilada, I really like that ornament. I'm a sucker for any kind of reflection and you got a really cool one there! Hey, that's a neat link as well. I was wishing it was longer, though. I was captivated by those shots!