Mini Competition #53

[Donald]

Off we go again.

Here's how it works ...

- You good folks post images in the thread (please change your post title to a name for your picture)

- When we get 10 images we will attach a voting poll

- After 3 days the poll closes and the winner is declared!

- If you would especially like some critique after the competition poll closes, please make it known in the post

Too easy eh?

Limit of 1 image per post, and 2 image posts per person.

If there are already 10 in the current comp, please start a new thread in this forum

[Dave Humphries]

A house with some history


1/500 @ f8, iso400, 200mm, +0.5 EC (12 December 2009 at 15:58)

Critique welcome after poll closes - thanks.

[Dave Humphries]

Circles within ...

Nikon D5000: 1/45s @ f8, iso1600 and 105mm, +0.5 EC.

Critique welcome after poll closes - thanks.

[Steve S]

[Colin Southern]

200KM of driving. 2x 580 Mk II strobes with CP-E4 High-voltage accelerators. 1/4 CTO gels. 2x TT5 Pocket Wizards & tall lightstands. Canon 1Ds3 camera (tethered to laptop PC) - EF70-200mm F2.8l IS USM lens @ 115mm. 1/30th @ F8 @ ISO 200 - shot after sunset.

Cheers!

[Henrik]

This is not just a response to Donald (in #52). I happen to like it.

[Donald]

200KM of driving. 2x 580 Mk II strobes with CP-E4 High-voltage accelerators. 1/4 CTO gels. 2x TT5 Pocket Wizards & tall lightstands. Canon 1Ds3 camera (tethered to laptop PC) - EF70-200mm F2.8l IS USM lens @ 115mm. 1/30th @ F8 @ ISO 200 - shot after sunset.

Yes, but .......... WHAT'S IN THE GLASSES? It looks pretty pale, so it must be one of those NZ Sauvignon Blancs that they keep winning all the wine awards for!
Your site wine geek

[ScoutR]

Nikon D3000: 1/400s: f/5.6: ISO 100: 200mm

C&C always welcome and appreciated
Thanks Wendy

[arith]

You are welcome to comment; courage needed to show it and I think I should stick at less abstract images.

[Geoff F]

The calm didn't last long. Five minutes later while I was scrabbling about in the undergrowth looking for another angle, the wind started once again.

[peterb533]

[crosseyed]

[PopsPhotos]

That's 10, already! That was fast. Guess we'll have to get in on #54.

Pops

[Henrik]

(...) courage needed to show it and I think I should stick at less abstract images.

Hi Arith,

Though this may not be your greatest masterpiece, I think you've taken a magnificent step into evolving your photo art to new, exciting hemispheres! Keep it up!

/Henrik

[arith]

cheers Henrik. It is nice to have some encouragement; it is hard to show what you see.

[ScoutR]

Hi Arith: I think a good one to try this effect on might be the Swan photo you had entered in mini comp #43.

Wendy

[arith]

Hi Arith: I think a good one to try this effect on might be the Swan photo you had entered in mini comp #43.

Wendy

I think I was trying to show pollution with noise; the colours interested me because without my specs that is all I can see. Showing it is a bit harder, but I think I would like to show regal, independence and pride with the swans.

This is worth a second look, but it isn't going to look like duck soup. However it is Christmas so happy christmas Wendy.

[cneedha]

Hope I can get a shot as nice as this next week. Thanks for the suggestions for a photo tour Peter.
Chris

[ScoutR]

Circles within ...

Nikon D5000: 1/45s @ f8, iso1600 and 105mm, +0.5 EC.

Critique welcome after poll closes - thanks.

Hi Dave: I'm not sure when the polling closes, but it looks like this one is wrapped up.

I mentioned in a previous post that I would like to use your 2 entries in this comp. to help me understand my camera better. Your camera and mine are close relatives, so I figure I should be able to get picutres like this from my Nikon D3000.

What I like about both these photos, is how clear and smooth they are. I'm using this one in particular as an example because of the exif data. 1/45s and 1600 ISO are certainly not contributing to the detail, but still, there it is - beautiful and clear.

I just don't get this in my shots, and I'm always wanting to adjust them to get them clearer. Soooo my question is: How did you do it? Did it come from the camera like this, or did you have to do some work on it. Do you use a tripod?

On another note, the out of focus background at f8 is also surprising to me. My camera would have probably left everything pretty clearly in focus at f/8, but that's just an observation, not really something I'm worried about right now.

Wendy

[Dave Humphries]

Hi Wendy,

Hi Dave: I'm not sure when the polling closes, but it looks like this one is wrapped up.

You're correct, it is closed. As much for other's benefit; it says, in grey text beneath the coloured bars, one of 3 things; "you have/have not voted", or "poll closed".

I mentioned in a previous post that I would like to use your 2 entries in this comp. to help me understand my camera better. Your camera and mine are close relatives, so I figure I should be able to get picutres like this from my Nikon D3000.

No worries, I'll do my best; but I didn't make any notes and I have done others since, so this could be vague

I think next time I will make notes and save at different stages for comparison purposes, but I don't really want to re-do this from scratch - if only because it might not be as good

I would hope you could get similar pics from a D3000 too, although the sensor must differ (10 vs 12 MP), but maybe that's not the only difference.

What I like about both these photos, is how clear and smooth they are. I'm using this one in particular as an example because of the exif data. 1/45s and 1600 ISO are certainly not contributing to the detail, but still, there it is - beautiful and clear.

I just don't get this in my shots, and I'm always wanting to adjust them to get them clearer. Soooo my question is: How did you do it? Did it come from the camera like this, or did you have to do some work on it.

I remember that day I was adjusting the iso up and down like crazy to cope with the available light (or lack of it). I have to say that in PP, I was surprised how this ended up being sooo slow (1/45s), even if at f8 AND be iso1600, but there it is.

Camera settings: I use the LS (Landscape) mode and the AF (left of centre, middle row) was on the "OU" of the sign.

No, it didn't come out of the camera like that, it came out like this:

That is "as shot", uncropped, from RAW > 8 bit saved as jpg at 1200 width so the circle is about same size.

I've just done a silly thing; in saving the above unprocessed picture, I have just destroyed the 'memory' of the settings I had used in ACR This really IS going to be a memory test

Oh well, moving swiftly on...
I note in ACR that the red channel is clipping (interestingly by the 1/2 stop I dialled in as + EC), I hit Auto, but that still leaves it over on the red panels of the "life belt" and the back of the white sign on right, which I don't care about anyway.

I think I then took a WB dropper in ACR on the silver letters so they would be neutral, this made the red clipping worse. Rather than use "Exposure" to bring it down, I use "Recovery" and set at max 100, still not perfect, but good enough.

WB - as shot on Auto in camera was 5550 (+2 tint), now 6150 (0 tint)

Other ACR settings, many are my "defaults":
Fill Light = 0
Blacks = 5 - I always adjust this to ensure no blue clipping warnings are showing
Brightness = +67, Contrast = +47 - I always let ACR do these 2 with Auto and rarely touch them manually
Clarity = +30, Vibrance = +15, Saturation = 0 - these are all my defaults
Sharpening: Amount 50, Radius 0.5, Detail 35, Masking 2 - these are all my defaults
Noise Reduction: Luminance 100, Color 100 - these are also my defaults

Open Image (Depth = 16 bit) - ACR closes, now we're in Elements Editor on Full Edit mode (and the memories are getting vaguer)

Due to the highish iso I used, I would have used Neat Image on it, given that the sign is cast/milled and there's no fine detail, I think I wound the luminance NR up to 85% in Neat Image. I think it sampled from the green paint on sign.

Crop and straighten, I think from looking for the maxima of the diameter of the elipse and making that vertical, not much else in shot is reliable.

There is a black cobweb strand running from 3 o'clock to 6 o'clock I cloned out (and blurred afterwards) I had to be quite careful or it showed on the wooden slats of the building behind. I would have had to convert to 8 bit to do this (I leave it as late as possible).

I'm sure I would have done a Local Contrast Enhancement (15%, 40px, 2) with USM
Plus a pseudo capture sharpen (150%, 0.3px, 2)

That's about it, down size to 800 px width (Bicubic), then a final USM sharpen - I really cannot remember the settings I used now, guessing again - 100%, 0.4, 1.

Do you use a tripod?

No, no tripod, I'm too lazy to cart one around and too self-conscious to set it up and use it 'in public' anyway

So that, in far too much detail, is how I did it.
I do those things in that order for a reason, sometimes the order changes slightly depending on the image, but generally, that's it.

Why is it 'smooth'? Well in this case, probably because I used Neat Image and deliberately over-cooked it, knowing the subject was more about shape than texture (unlike my trees shot), but I would suggest 'wanging' those ACR Noise Reduction sliders to teh right yourself

On another note, the out of focus background at f8 is also surprising to me. My camera would have probably left everything pretty clearly in focus at f/8, but that's just an observation, not really something I'm worried about right now.

Good, I'm glad you're not worried because, unless the laws of physics are different in Canada, for the same focal length (105mm) and field of view, same given aperture (f8) and crop factor (1.5), you must get the same DoF on your D3000

Joking aside, I was about, oooh, 2-3m from the sign and the life belt was way over the far side of the lock at some 20-30m, so I think you would have got the separation too.

Cheers,