Rate the Photo Above you

[vanished]

1 hour ago, Xafer said:

I love the photos 9/10

There are a few minor details that could be improved imo, but nothing major. 

I would love to see the "Best of the bunch" cause these are stunning.

 

 

I was going to say I think you may have set your black level a bit off or something because they seemed clipped, but zooming in to see full size, was this on a cell phone?  How did you get so close!?  

[Xafer]

37 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

I was going to say I think you may have set your black level a bit off or something because they seemed clipped, but zooming in to see full size, was this on a cell phone?  How did you get so close!?  

Nope. Jpeg shot with a 200mm lens and then cropped. Focus is terrible since it was shot from a moving car.

[vanished]

1 minute ago, Xafer said:

Nope. Jpeg shot with a 200mm lens and then cropped. Focus is terrible since it was shot from a moving car.

ah, that could be it then.  Regardless it's impressive  

[Xafer]

1 minute ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

ah, that could be it then.  Regardless it's impressive  

Thanks.

Wish i had shot it in RAW so i had some more data to work with. But it was one of my first pictures taken after getting my first camera.

[Bsmith]

On 6-2-2017 at 9:14 PM, Xafer said:

I love the photos 9/10

There are a few minor details that could be improved imo, but nothing major. 

I would love to see the "Best of the bunch" cause these are stunning.

 

-rated snip-

7/10, shame you didn't have the ability to shoot it properly.

 

Recently to the city, sadly it wasn't this quite but photoshop helped me to it tho.

[AkiraDaarkst]

8 hours ago, Bsmith said:

7/10, shame you didn't have the ability to shoot it properly.

 

Recently to the city, sadly it wasn't this quite but photoshop helped me to it tho.

Horizon seems to be a bit tilted, there aren't any real clear lines that lead the eyes towards something interesting, colors look a bit washed out (likely because the photo looks like it was taken on a very overcast day), it absolutely looks boring.  If this photo is supposed to be an artistic shot, I don't really see any artistic value (at least in my view).  I see at least three interesting architectural structures in the photo that might have made better shots if you focused solely on them.  The greenish building on the right, the shapes and patterns on its exterior walls.  The metro entrance ways, with their half sunken sideways cone shapes.  The geodesic dome building behind the brown building that has what looks like McDonald's written sideways.

 

Another potential point of interest would be that glass/brown building in the far middle, with what looks like a white circle I guess is the logo of the hotel.  From a distance it looks like a moon reflecting off the glass.

[Chase Haddleton]

@Bsmith I would rate your photo, but I believe @AkiraDaarkst did an excellent and thorough job.

 

One of my friends recently asked me to do a headshot for him and this was the photo we ended up going with, and surprisingly it was taken only with ambient lighting (sadly, because of this, it has a somewhat high ISO, so some noise comes through).

 

 

[GamerzCentralYT]

12 minutes ago, Chase Haddleton said:

@Bsmith I would rate your photo, but I believe @AkiraDaarkst did an excellent and thorough job.

 

One of my friends recently asked me to do a headshot for him and this was the photo we ended up going with, and surprisingly it was taken only with ambient lighting (sadly, because of this, it has a somewhat high ISO, so some noise comes through).

 

 

Beautiful headshot! I can barely see any noise 9/10!

 

Here is mine taken on a Nikon N90s and Kodak ASA 400 Color film. I personally love the imperfections of the film in this photo.

 

[Bsmith]

9 hours ago, AkiraDaarkst said:

Horizon seems to be a bit tilted, there aren't any real clear lines that lead the eyes towards something interesting, colors look a bit washed out (likely because the photo looks like it was taken on a very overcast day), it absolutely looks boring.  If this photo is supposed to be an artistic shot, I don't really see any artistic value (at least in my view).  I see at least three interesting architectural structures in the photo that might have made better shots if you focused solely on them.  The greenish building on the right, the shapes and patterns on its exterior walls.  The metro entrance ways, with their half sunken sideways cone shapes.  The geodesic dome building behind the brown building that has what looks like McDonald's written sideways.

 

Another potential point of interest would be that glass/brown building in the far middle, with what looks like a white circle I guess is the logo of the hotel.  From a distance it looks like a moon reflecting off the glass.

Yeah the shot it's self came out pretty rubbish, but I wanted to do some experimental work with layering to improve my photoshop skills, which it did so I achieved that goal(yeay)
I ussual stay out of cities due to some of the points you mentioned. For example, this shot was at 18mm and to get this frame I stood at most 3meters away from a busy road. The lines where hard to get straight since the ground is far from smooth(despite the concrete) and the buildings had different height's and angle's. Things that probably could have been worked with, but not with my current knowledge and experience, so maybe later I will try it again.
Thanks for the thorough rating.

8 hours ago, Chase Haddleton said:

@Bsmith I would rate your photo, but I believe @AkiraDaarkst did an excellent and thorough job.

can't do anything but agree.

[AkiraDaarkst]

12 minutes ago, Bsmith said:

 

For the tilting, skew, distortions in the photo, the latest versions of LR has a panel called Transform where you can make corrections.  Sometimes it's just easier to correct it in post than trying to correct it during production.  To get it correct during production, you need proper placement of camera and lens, or even specialty lenses (namely Tilt-Shit lenses).

 

Or you can use a plugin called DxO Viewpoint, which I personally prefer because I think it's a much more powerful tool.  This video only shows a small part of what it can do, the latest version has some improved and new features.

 

[Tam3n]

14 hours ago, GamerzCentralYT said:

Beautiful headshot! I can barely see any noise 9/10!

 

Here is mine taken on a Nikon N90s and Kodak ASA 400 Color film. I personally love the imperfections of the film in this photo.

 

 

It has nice nostalgic feel to it. Makes me think of something like the 50s when the first commercial airplanes came out. The framing is also quite nice.

 

It's been a couple of colder days here, and I noticed some nice ice crystals have formed outside in certain spots. I tried to take some macros of them today, something I have been meaning to do for a while.

 

[AkiraDaarkst]

8 hours ago, Tam3n said:

 

It has nice nostalgic feel to it. Makes me think of something like the 50s when the first commercial airplanes came out. The framing is also quite nice.

 

It's been a couple of colder days here, and I noticed some nice ice crystals have formed outside in certain spots. I tried to take some macros of them today, something I have been meaning to do for a while.

 

I'd like to know which lens setup you used to get this seemingly high magnification.

 

23 hours ago, GamerzCentralYT said:

Beautiful headshot! I can barely see any noise 9/10!

 

Here is mine taken on a Nikon N90s and Kodak ASA 400 Color film. I personally love the imperfections of the film in this photo.

 

With all the seriously chaotic antics of a so called head of state that's been making headlines almost everyday for the past three weeks or so, I saw this photo and thought... On no! That orange skinned toupee wearing joke is going to see this photo and claim some country in the world is conducting ICBM tests...

[Tam3n]

10 hours ago, AkiraDaarkst said:

I'd like to know which lens setup you used to get this seemingly high magnification.

Sure, it's shot in natural light with Sony a5100 and my Samyang 12 mm f/2.0 NCS CS (a great wide angle lens) in reversed configuration, a nice trick to get good magnification:

 

Upon seeing your question, I also started to wonder how much magnification does this setup really give... So I took some test shots of a meter (millimeter scale):

Looks like around 7.2 mm fits on the sensor. Sony APC-C sensor width is 23.5 mm, so magnification would be 23.5/7.2 = 3.2, or around 3:1 in macro terms.

 

I continued the tests with the same setup but I attached some extension tubes, 52 mm in total (you can also see that the working distance is very close):

I opened the aperture more to balance diffraction limit, but then dof becomes pretty narrow =>

Looks like around 3.2 mm => magnification 23.5/3.2 = 7.3, or about 7:1 in macro terms. Maybe I should go and try what I get with this

 

Also you can mess with coupling a reversed wide angle lens at the end of "normal" lens (longer the focal length, the greater magnification). It will act like a great magnifier, but it's not perfect. Here's the Samyang reversed at the end my Sigma 60mm:

 

This is actually shot with that setup + extension tubes, image circle doesn't cover the whole sensor:

It might be a tad sharper, with around 6:1-5:1 magnification (not the same part of the ruler unfortunately). But you would need to also do some cropping...

 

For comparison, here's a picture taken with just the Sigma 60 mm + 52 mm extension tubes:

 

And it's not even that sharp... I used something like Sigma 60 mm + 26 mm extension tubes last summer to get pics of insects and stuff, gives a bit more working distance.

 

But yeah for stuff like this it seems like the reversed lens works great. It's sunny outside, maybe I should go test some more

 

And sorry this post somehow became a little long.

[vanished]

37 minutes ago, Tam3n said:

 

Wow that's amazing!  That's like microscope levels of zoom  

[AkiraDaarkst]

2 hours ago, Tam3n said:

Sure, it's shot in natural light with Sony a5100 and my Samyang 12 mm f/2.0 NCS CS (a great wide angle lens) in reversed configuration, a nice trick to get good magnification

Thanks, the moment I saw the photo I figured it had to either be with an extension tube or reverse mounting a lens because a normal 1:1 magnification macro lens wouldn't be able to achieve this on a normal mount setup.

[Tam3n]

2 hours ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

Wow that's amazing!  That's like microscope levels of zoom  

Haha yeah... I have also tried my old russian 300 mm with teleconverter + the Samyang 12 mm reversed, but it's just too ridiculous..:

It took me forever just to find the focus and a line on the ruler. Also I had to shoot wide open on high iso to see anything at all and of course the result is garbage. But hey it's 50:1 or something x)

 

37 minutes ago, AkiraDaarkst said:

Thanks, the moment I saw the photo I figured it had to either be with an extension tube or reverse mounting a lens because a normal 1:1 magnification macro lens wouldn't be able to achieve this on a normal mount setup.

Yep, I'm surprised how well it works.

 

Btw, I shot more of the ice crystals today, but I noticed that the higher magnification with extension tubes didn't really bring anything to the images. There's just not enough interesting detail on the crystals at that zoom level, so I ended up shooting with 3:1 as before

[vanished]

5 hours ago, Tam3n said:

Haha yeah... I have also tried my old russian 300 mm with teleconverter + the Samyang 12 mm reversed, but it's just too ridiculous..:

 

 yeah that doesn't seem to have worked too well... it's blurry like what happens when you have more MP than your lens actually has sharpness for  

Although I can't see how that could be the problem in this case so I'm not sure what's going on here...

[Tam3n]

20 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

 yeah that doesn't seem to have worked too well... it's blurry like what happens when you have more MP than your lens actually has sharpness for  

Although I can't see how that could be the problem in this case so I'm not sure what's going on here...

Yes, the optics just aren't up to the task. Lenses can only resolve detail up to a point, magnifying it just makes it more ugly 

[Chase Haddleton]

On 2017-02-09 at 10:42 AM, Tam3n said:

 

It has nice nostalgic feel to it. Makes me think of something like the 50s when the first commercial airplanes came out. The framing is also quite nice.

 

It's been a couple of colder days here, and I noticed some nice ice crystals have formed outside in certain spots. I tried to take some macros of them today, something I have been meaning to do for a while.

 

-snip-

Love it! The detail is great and it's visually intriguing.

 

To continue my portrait series 

 

 

 

[vanished]

41 minutes ago, Chase Haddleton said:

Love it! The detail is great and it's visually intriguing.

 

To continue my portrait series 

I've always wanted to try that cyan & red double light trick for the interesting shadows it makes, but after seeing this I don't think I would do it (at least not exclusively) for a portrait.  It makes the skin look dead and sickly imo

[Hackentosher]

 

 

So this is my first successful attempt at long exposure photography I'm really proud of these shots, I just flew my drone in front of my camera in front of my street.

 

• 6 second exposure
• F 11
• ISO 100

[Hackentosher]

On 2/10/2017 at 4:17 PM, Chase Haddleton said:

Love it! The detail is great and it's visually intriguing.

 

To continue my portrait series 

 

snip

 

 

Whoops, forgot to quote the image above me  

 

I like this shot, the colors in the background are really interesting, I like it! Your model looks a little stoned, but whatever, I don't see any noise in the photo I guess if I was to critique anything, the background is a little bland, but the color kinda makes up for that. Great work! 9.8/10

[SQZY98]

10 hours ago, Hackentosher said:

 

 

So this is my first successful attempt at long exposure photography I'm really proud of these shots, I just flew my drone in front of my camera in front of my street.

 

• 6 second exposure
• F 11
• ISO 100

I like that. Here's an idea: Set up your camera for when you are doing a ordinary flight. Maybe something interesting comes out with the LEDs shining. Though...darkness and drones are not a good combination. A more interesting background would be nice I guess, but who am I to say that.

 

I tested the ND filter again on a day with bright sunshine and light fog:

 

[AkiraDaarkst]

14 hours ago, Hackentosher said:

 

 

So this is my first successful attempt at long exposure photography I'm really proud of these shots, I just flew my drone in front of my camera in front of my street.

 

• 6 second exposure
• F 11
• ISO 100

If you hadn't mentioned how you did this with a drone, everyone would just assume you'd taken a multi-color flashlight or light source and twirled it around a few times in front of the camera.  And everyone would also be wondering "What the fuck is this guy trying to show?"

[vanished]

16 hours ago, SQZY98 said:

I tested the ND filter again on a day with bright sunshine and light fog:

 

I find the vignetting from the lens to be beyond artistic and more just problematic... it's so intensely black in the corners, and being a landscape, there's no one central thing to draw attention to so it's not an effect that works for me personally.  The horizon also seems to be quite noticeably off-level. I do quite like the mood of the scene though

 

Ok, here's one of mine