|
fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuck
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2012 03:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 19:45 |
|
|
Holy poo poo, please tell me how you did that. 10 stop ND filter and exposure stacking?
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2012 03:57
|
|
|
Please help us reach your level of awesomeness.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2012 07:39
|
|
|
vote_no posted:Holy poo poo, please tell me how you did that. 10 stop ND filter and exposure stacking? 20s, f/16, 4 stop ND and a soft grad nd handheld, 2 exposures. I almost left the spot and gave up early because I had my dogs with me (big mistake) and they were leashed up to a rock just behind me, of course this made them decide to howl like they were dying the whole time, right in the middle of a coyote infested area.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2012 16:56
|
|
|
whaam posted:20s, f/16, 4 stop ND and a soft grad nd handheld, 2 exposures. Once I get my gear back up and running I'm stealing your secret formula! Seriously, very nice work. My brother gives me poo poo for shooting landscapes in portrait orientation but I just can't help myself.  IMG_2008.jpg by Brian.M.K, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2012 19:35
|
|
|
Cliffs own in portrait.  DSC_0056.jpg by MrDespair, on Flickr e. they own in landscape too though. Cliffs own in general.  DSC_0031.jpg by MrDespair, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2012 19:37
|
|
|
Rot posted:
Really great photo. The tiny tree at the top, the rock texture, sky, everything is just perfect. Slightly offtopic - going to Peru next month, hope to get lots of cliff pictures of my own!
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2012 22:31
|
|
|
Ninja Woodchuck posted:Really great photo. The tiny tree at the top, the rock texture, sky, everything is just perfect. Thanks. If you look very close (maybe at the large res on flickr) beside those little trees on top you can see the ruins of an Inca traveler's house. Peru is an amazing place for photography! Bring extra mem cards and batteries because you'll never have enough of either.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2012 22:59
|
|
|
down in Poole at the mo; the town is a classic English seaside shithole, but the dying harbour is perfect for bleak photography... broken boats i by ____||||||||||||||||||, on Flickr  pylons ii by ____||||||||||||||||||, on Flickr  reflected landscape by ____||||||||||||||||||, on Flickr  poole harbour ii by ____||||||||||||||||||, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2012 16:47
|
|
|
Scatterfold posted:
If it wasn't for the second one, I'd be very confused by the first one
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2012 20:29
|
|
|
Autumn in Minnesota, October 13: Four Bridges on Flickr  Exit Here on Flickr Winter in Minnesota, October 20:  Riley Lake on Flickr  Foggy Staring Lake on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Oct 20, 2012 20:43
|
|
|
My first trip to the west coast:   I like the walker guy in the first one but I wish the rest of the beach was a little cleaner. I have three more that I am finishing up (and will post soon) that may be my favorites from the trip. I'm so incredibly jealous of this shot. I forgot to take my ND filter on my trip and would have loved to use it in about a million places. I did have two graduated filters that helped, but even both combined didn't block enough light! Really, really great shot! Gambl0r fucked around with this message at 15:11 on Oct 21, 2012 |
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2012 15:08
|
|
|
 
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2012 04:05
|
|
|
This owns, by the way.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2012 13:10
|
|
|
Hi. Yes.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2012 14:25
|
|
|
  
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2012 03:13
|
|
|
  Wish I had a tripod for the night shot but I'm surprised it turned out as well as it did since I was shooting through a fence.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2012 05:44
|
|
|
Scatterfold posted:
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2012 16:06
|
|
|
 Valley Sunset by atomicthumbs, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2012 01:37
|
|
|
 
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2012 06:52
|
|
|
Love the colours in this. Seems pretty soft though?
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2012 10:46
|
|
|
First one is awesome. Are you using a CPL on most of your water shots? You always get such clear transparent water.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2012 12:55
|
|
|
whaam posted:First one is awesome. Are you using a CPL on most of your water shots? You always get such clear transparent water. Nope, first one was just an ND filter.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2012 16:40
|
|
|
atomicthumbs posted:
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2012 22:59
|
|
|
Clown posted:Love the colours in this. Seems pretty soft though? Everything to the left of the foreground tower is a little soft when viewed at original size... I should have used a smaller aperture. I didn't because I was having so much trouble with my stupid shutter release not working, I pulled it out and was limited to a 30 second exposure. Two more:   Next, I have to post some Redwoods shots. As usual when shooting in the forest, I thought I was getting great stuff while I was there, and now I look at the photos in Lightroom and I'm disappointed. :|
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2012 18:53
|
|
|
 Recede by atomicthumbs, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2012 21:39
|
|
|
Gambl0r posted:Next, I have to post some Redwoods shots. As usual when shooting in the forest, I thought I was getting great stuff while I was there, and now I look at the photos in Lightroom and I'm disappointed. :| I know, I took this of General Sherman. I hate everything about it  
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2012 23:22
|
|
|
^ there's a great deku tree face in there somewhere
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2012 23:28
|
|
|
Now I can see nothing but the face!
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2012 23:48
|
|
|
I have been wanting to get a "forest" photo for years now. The problem is you need a very specific light and the forest needs to be open enough that you can actually see things.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2012 00:40
|
|
|
Dread Head posted:I have been wanting to get a "forest" photo for years now. The problem is you need a very specific light and the forest needs to be open enough that you can actually see things. If it's taken you literally years and you haven't made the photo you want maybe you need to change something.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2012 00:47
|
|
|
JAY ZERO SUM GAME posted:You can make great photos in any light anywhere. To make the photo you are imagining you need an "open enough" forest and "very specific light," that doesn't mean there are other options out there. Not really put much effort into it and I guess I should rephrase the photo I have in my mind needs to have an open forest.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2012 00:57
|
|
|
JAY ZERO SUM GAME posted:You can make great photos in any light anywhere. To make the photo you are imagining you need an "open enough" forest and "very specific light," that doesn't mean there are other options out there. Yeah, he could make a photo, but not the photo. I don't even leave the house if the light isn't right.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2012 01:25
|
|
|
JAY ZERO SUM GAME posted:You can make great photos in any light anywhere. To make the photo you are imagining you need an "open enough" forest and "very specific light," that doesn't mean there are other options out there. Have you ever tried taken a picture of a forest in poo poo light? e. pls post examples of your great photos in poo poo light, tia Dr. Despair fucked around with this message at 01:30 on Oct 29, 2012 |
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2012 01:27
|
|
|
Framing is everything, mentally. If you are locked into looking for a very specific photo, then you aren't going to see anything else. That the light is poo poo for what you wanted doesn't preclude the possibility of other good photographs being possible at the same time.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2012 01:33
|
|
|
Yeah, I'm getting into that argument. Everyone on the internet is obsessed with "great light" and I am not really sure what that is anymore. Think about what you are photographing, why, and what you are trying to say and stop obsessing over perfect light and such things. A lot of people here have perfectly sufficient technical skill but are stuck in an echo chamber and aren't producing much work worth discussing or even viewing. And that should bother you, not just invoke a mad post. But that's what it'll do.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2012 01:43
|
|
|
JAY ZERO SUM GAME posted:A lot of people here have perfectly sufficient technical skill but are stuck in an echo chamber and aren't producing much work worth discussing or even viewing. Or maybe most of us aren't professional photographers and are just sharing photos that we thought looked nice?
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2012 01:46
|
|
|
Dread Head posted:I have been wanting to get a "forest" photo for years now. The problem is you need a very specific light and the forest needs to be open enough that you can actually see things. I know exactly what you mean. I've been trying for a long time, too... and so far have no forest photos I'm really proud of. While it is possible to get a good photo in whatever conditions - a truly striking photo taken in the forest is difficult. You want little ground cover so the shot doesn't look completely random and cluttered, and you need enough open canopy to let in some light but not too open or it will look like you're outside the forest looking in. And overcast shots in the forest look flat and lame (I know, since I spent a good two days in a completely overcast redwoods forest )And to correct Jay Zero Sum Game - If it's taken you literally years and you haven't made the photo you want, keep trying.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2012 01:50
|
|
|
shut the forum down folks, we've become an echo chamber. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2012 01:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 19:45 |
|
|
vote_no posted:Or maybe most of us aren't professional photographers and are just sharing photos that we thought looked nice?
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2012 01:52
|
|