Any photographers in here?
- Thread starter ChopstickHero
- Start date
oaklandopen
Member
Funky....in that last shot is that a cell phone in his pocket or is he just.....okay ill stop being lame now
FunkyBuddha
Tuned by Slick Nick
- :
- 2003 Spicy Orange MSP
He was happy to see me..that's all.
Thanks. I need to practice my focusin skills w/ the 50mm @ 1.8.
Wagonbacker9
Member
- :
- 2004 'Hoe
Some more shots from Jamaica, as I continue to try to catch up processing everything I shot:
Myself and the woman at Rick's Cafe... cliff jumping FTW!:
These lil bastards kept picking through our food, prb about a 50% crop:
and, one of my favorites out of the lensbaby, especially given the near-absent light:
Mandatory Beach Pano:
Myself and the woman at Rick's Cafe... cliff jumping FTW!:
These lil bastards kept picking through our food, prb about a 50% crop:
and, one of my favorites out of the lensbaby, especially given the near-absent light:
Mandatory Beach Pano:
Last edited:
oaklandopen
Member
The bird is ≥ the word
FunkyBuddha
Tuned by Slick Nick
- :
- 2003 Spicy Orange MSP
The thing with that is that the 60 has a swivel screen. My G11 has a swivel and I totally find it handy when shooting low angle or high angle shots.
Wagonbacker9
Member
- :
- 2004 'Hoe
thanks guys. lol
Its a heavy crop, but I know I've seen pics cropped closer without pixelation like I'm seeing on the back of the head. Is that likely from post? Or just better equipment being used? Or is this still just a "me" problem? lol
oaklandopen
Member
You can only crop and zoom so much. What used to be grain is now pixels
Goliat6288
Member
- :
- 1998 Mazda Millenia L
wrong sir... the bird IS the word!!!!
I'd say you've got two things going on in that bird photo...
1. noise - the more you crop, the more noise you see.
2. missed focus - due to the shallow depth of field, the tail is in focus, but the head is not. When you sharpen something that is out of focus, strange things can happen.
exif data shows 1/5000 sec shutter, f/5.6, ISO 1600. Better to have shot ~1/300 sec, iso 200, f/8. it would have been sharper with the narrower aperture, less noisy because of the lower ISO, and you wouldn't have suffered from 1/300 sec at 55mm. plenty fast.
1. noise - the more you crop, the more noise you see.
2. missed focus - due to the shallow depth of field, the tail is in focus, but the head is not. When you sharpen something that is out of focus, strange things can happen.
exif data shows 1/5000 sec shutter, f/5.6, ISO 1600. Better to have shot ~1/300 sec, iso 200, f/8. it would have been sharper with the narrower aperture, less noisy because of the lower ISO, and you wouldn't have suffered from 1/300 sec at 55mm. plenty fast.
I'd say you've got two things going on in that bird photo...
1. noise - the more you crop, the more noise you see.
2. missed focus - due to the shallow depth of field, the tail is in focus, but the head is not. When you sharpen something that is out of focus, strange things can happen.
exif data shows 1/5000 sec shutter, f/5.6, ISO 1600. Better to have shot ~1/300 sec, iso 200, f/8. it would have been sharper with the narrower aperture, less noisy because of the lower ISO, and you wouldn't have suffered from 1/300 sec at 55mm. plenty fast.
1. noise - the more you crop, the more noise you see.
2. missed focus - due to the shallow depth of field, the tail is in focus, but the head is not. When you sharpen something that is out of focus, strange things can happen.
exif data shows 1/5000 sec shutter, f/5.6, ISO 1600. Better to have shot ~1/300 sec, iso 200, f/8. it would have been sharper with the narrower aperture, less noisy because of the lower ISO, and you wouldn't have suffered from 1/300 sec at 55mm. plenty fast.
oaklandopen
Member
Whoa....how'd you get that info? Did he send you the files, or can you get that from his uploads?
Wagonbacker9
Member
- :
- 2004 'Hoe
True, but I've seen guys do 100% crops (a smaller section of the original frame) than this, which are substantially sharper. Most of them are very experienced, and have very nice equipment (most of them I've seen tend to be telephoto). My question was primarily directed at which was the more critical facet, which appears to be answered below.
Definitely my fail on the ISO setting, I guess I thought 5.6 would be deep enough.. thanks for the input again!
On a related note, what would you recommend for max settings on an unsharp mask?
From what he's looked at of mine, I gather he found/made a program that pulls the exif out of the uploaded JPEG somehow. Pretty neat trick!
Last edited:
oaklandopen
Member
^that is pretty cool. And had I known how high your ISO was I probably could have pointed that out as well
But getting a shot like thatwould be tough for me at anything other than a fast shutter, especially when the ambient lighting is iffy.
I have a 70-300 zoom with active vibration reduction, but its nothing like those big telephoto lenses so my lighting is very small, so my ISO is always set high to get fast shots. Wish I could afford everything. About all I use that lense for is subjects with extremely blurred backgrounds, like a lot of my car shots. My sport photos were always too grainy for me due to high ISO to compensate for fast shutter
But getting a shot like thatwould be tough for me at anything other than a fast shutter, especially when the ambient lighting is iffy.
I have a 70-300 zoom with active vibration reduction, but its nothing like those big telephoto lenses so my lighting is very small, so my ISO is always set high to get fast shots. Wish I could afford everything. About all I use that lense for is subjects with extremely blurred backgrounds, like a lot of my car shots. My sport photos were always too grainy for me due to high ISO to compensate for fast shutter
FunkyBuddha
Tuned by Slick Nick
- :
- 2003 Spicy Orange MSP
I guess it's still just a "you" problem LOL. Keep at it. You have to nail these focuses down man. It's been like a year almost. Get on it!
FunkyBuddha
Tuned by Slick Nick
- :
- 2003 Spicy Orange MSP
You seriously gonna ask the max settings on an unsharp mask? I'm sorry man..but your skillz have to improve first before you can even touch post processing techniques. If the focus is bad on that bird, then no matter what you do..you can't put that into focus again.
New Posts and Comments
-
- Sticky
- Article
