Nature photography
Apr 16, 2004 at 2:16 PM Post #46 of 65
Quote:

Originally posted by kevin gilmore

Even on a really fast computer with lots and lots of memory
adobe really chokes on these massive images.


You mean a really fast Windows computer... (my Powerbook handles it fine)
tongue.gif


Have you ever tried printing out an image from your digital camera? I'd imagine you could get up to poster-size and above with amazing results.
 
Apr 16, 2004 at 4:32 PM Post #47 of 65
Even with the Kodak DCS, I think it would be hard to print something poster sized with exhibition quality. For that you really need medium format film, or with a 10+ mp back. Ideally have a 20 mp scanning back or large format...


As for the photos -- Pauly, I really think that your picture of Hinkle Roadhouse is fantastic. The combination of the lights on the platform and the still blue sky make for a great shot. Your diagonal composition is really good as well.
On the issue of light, if you find yourself often in the situation where you want to take pictures, but can only do it when it is cloudy, you might invest in a warming filter. They will make the tones a little nicer when under cloud cover. Of course, you can do the same thing in photoshop for free if you already have it...
 
Apr 16, 2004 at 4:44 PM Post #48 of 65
quote
You mean a really fast Windows computer... (my Powerbook handles it fine)

Anything over 10 seconds i consider a choke. I'm just slightly
impatient.

quote
Have you ever tried printing out an image from your digital camera? I'd imagine you could get up to poster-size and above with amazing results.

Printing one today on an E size epson... Started it over an
hour ago. Its still printing. Quality looks outrageous.
So is the price on the ink and archival paper.

Then again i'm sure an E size photo print from kodak ain't
cheap either.
 
Apr 16, 2004 at 4:48 PM Post #50 of 65
No prob. Keep shooting and posting links to the shots, listen to some criticisms and decide what is just your style, and what is necessary to change. That way you'll end up with the best of both worlds: a unique way of shooting the world (your way), and some ideas on what is good advice from others with more experience.
 
Apr 16, 2004 at 6:59 PM Post #51 of 65
Quote:

Originally posted by Stephonovich
I've also got ones that will upsize in 10% increments and do some light sharpening, or just upsize.

Sidenote on that, if you ever find a picture that's not big enough for you, don't just jump up in one shot. For an unknown reason, upsizing in 10% increments is insanely better quality. I made it into an action as well; F11 now makes the picture 10% bigger, with Bicubic Smoother. I've actually doubled a picture once (did it 10 times) and you could have printed it just fine.


How do you make an action that upsizes in 10% increments? I can only get them to upsize to a particular resolution.
 
Apr 16, 2004 at 7:34 PM Post #52 of 65
Quote:

Originally posted by eric343
How do you make an action that upsizes in 10% increments? I can only get them to upsize to a particular resolution.


I assume you know how to make actions already, so I won't delve into that... as for resolutions, when you go into the 'Image Size' window, there should be a drop down menu to the right of the Width and Height fields, where you can select Pixels or Percent. Select that, then type 110% in the Width and Height fields.

(-:Stephonovich:)
 
Apr 16, 2004 at 7:39 PM Post #53 of 65
Quote:

Originally posted by stuartr
Even with the Kodak DCS, I think it would be hard to print something poster sized with exhibition quality. For that you really need medium format film, or with a 10+ mp back. Ideally have a 20 mp scanning back or large format...


As for the photos -- Pauly, I really think that your picture of Hinkle Roadhouse is fantastic. The combination of the lights on the platform and the still blue sky make for a great shot. Your diagonal composition is really good as well.
On the issue of light, if you find yourself often in the situation where you want to take pictures, but can only do it when it is cloudy, you might invest in a warming filter. They will make the tones a little nicer when under cloud cover. Of course, you can do the same thing in photoshop for free if you already have it...


I'm glad you liked the roundhouse shot. That was a night shot that I have never been happy with. The shovel in the foreground bugs the heck out of me. I took that last year and I hadn't learned to look at the composition completely yet. I didn't notice that darn shovel was there.
mad.gif


My favorite shots are on the second page of my site. Some of that stuff is there to link to here.

I need to get Photoshop. I have been using Jasc paintshop 7 and I haven't been too happy with it sometimes.

I also need a better camera. I've been looking at a Canon Pro1. It seems okay for a grand or so. At least I can attach filters to it.
 
Apr 16, 2004 at 10:29 PM Post #54 of 65
Pauly, if you were ready to drop 1000 dollars on a camera, I would highly recommend getting the digital rebel (or the nikon d70) instead of the pro 1. For the same price you will get an SLR with the 18-55 mm lens. The lens is probably not as good as the one on the pro 1, but for the cost it is a great deal. Though the digital rebel has fewer megapixels, I would be willing to bet it had better image quality. It uses the same exact sensor that is in the EOS 10D, which is a great camera. The other advantage is that you can add lenses to your system -- the quality of which is dependent on what you want to pay and what you choose. If you choose a fixed focal length 35mm or 50 mm lens, I would expect that it would outperform the pro 1 easily, and the lenses will be faster too. This makes the digital rebel MUCH more versatile than the pro 1. You could stick any one of nearly 100 lenses on the camera. Beyond that, the next time you want a new camera, you will not have to buy new lenses, just a better body. This is more economical in the long run. The filters are usually easier to come by and so on and so forth.

As for photoshop, it is only really a good deal if you are a student (they give it to you for something like 400 dollars off). As a regular buyer it is about 600 bucks with tax -- unless you are doing some major work, you are better off with Photoshop elements, which is a great program. If you want, I will send it to you, as when I got a mac I bought photoshop 7.0, so I have a copy of elements that I don't need.
For your picture, I noticed the shovel, but it did not distract me that much. Why don't you just photoshop it out??
very_evil_smiley.gif
 
Apr 16, 2004 at 10:59 PM Post #55 of 65
I use the pentax *istD. which if you arent printing above 16x20, which I'm sure most of you aren't, provides plenty of resolution... And it's available now for close to the D70's price. The two cameras are very similar, the D70 is about a year newer so it has a couple advantages, and the istD is slightly better constructed having metal frame (D70 is all plastic).

Here are a couple sample pics taken with the 20-35mm Pentax wide angle zoom lens.

Touched up in Photoshop just a little, the color is straight out of the camera, just a little sharpening.


Example 1

Example 2
 
Apr 16, 2004 at 11:15 PM Post #56 of 65
Nice photos dabeststax.

The reason I lean towards an all in one camera is portability. I want one to take with me to work. I don't have the room to pack a full camera and several lenses. In fact that Pro1 may be bigger than I can comfortably carry to work. I was thinking about something a bit better than the S30 I have, but not up to the level of a digital SLR yet. I was also thinking that I would get one I would want to keep even after getting a digital SLR later on. Like having an portable CD player and real CD player.
biggrin.gif


edit
Maybe I should drop back to a Canon G5. Less money and a bit smaller. That would also shorten the time it would take to get a digital Rebel or something like that.
 
Apr 16, 2004 at 11:32 PM Post #57 of 65
Quote:

Originally posted by eric343
You mean a really fast Windows computer... (my Powerbook handles it fine)
tongue.gif


Have you ever tried printing out an image from your digital camera? I'd imagine you could get up to poster-size and above with amazing results.


Actually Mac's advantage in Photoshop has evaporated to nothing. It used to be the case that MAC handled images better than PC's but those days have passed.

benchmarks

That test isn't quite fair due to the fact that the Opteron 246 used in that test is one step below the 248 which is significantly faster. And the G5's used are Apples top of the line. Oh well, nothings perfect, still you can see that both are massively powerful, and strangely AMD leads in photoshop.

Maybe thats what KG needs to look into? DUAL opteron 248's.
 
Apr 16, 2004 at 11:38 PM Post #58 of 65
Quote:

Originally posted by Mr.PD
Nice photos dabeststax.




Thanks MR. PD.

I've heard some bad things about the G5, although its a decent camera. If sheer portability is what you are after try the optio s4i, its a tiny machine that would fit in an altoids tin with ease. But, due to an ingenious lens design, it actually has a tiny 35-105mm zoom lens. The lens shuffles the glass elements up into the camera when you turn it off in order to maintain a slim profile, pretty cool IMO.
 
Apr 16, 2004 at 11:44 PM Post #59 of 65
that's with photoshop 7 though (and they don't tell you what they are doing), but isn't photoshop CS supposed to have software that is more optimized for the G5, or am I just out of the loop? (Or never in it...a dual 2ghz 64 bit processor of any type should be more than enough for almost anyone).
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top