Picture of the Day

http://i409.photobucket.com/albums/p...py1024x768.jpg


Camera: Nikon D40
ISO: 200
Shutter: 1/250
Aperture: f/5.3
Focal Length: 38mm
Exposure Bias: -0.7
Lens: Nikkor 18-55 3.5-5.6 II ED VR

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3283/...7e41c247_b.jpg


Camera: Canon Digital Rebel XSi
ISO: 100
Shutter: 0.005 sec (1/200)
Aperture: f/4
Focal Length: 27 mm
Exposure Bias: 0 EV
Lens: Canon EF-S 18-55mm

Nice angle grinder shot!

http://i71.photobucket.com/albums/i1...n85/denim3.jpg

Camera: Fujifilm S6500fd
ISO: can't remember
Shutter: can't remember
Aperture: can't remember
Focal Length: can't remember
Exposure Bias: 0 step
Lens: Fujifilm S6500fd standard

Love that shot Marin, How do you do that ??

And cool shot Shogan

D300
70-200 F2.8VR
200MM
ISO 500
1/125 exposure time

http://www.flickr.com/photos/maxxxracer/3110943830/

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3113/...bbf95871_b.jpg

Maxx that's a good shot but overexposed :p

Did you buy that 70-200 Maxxx? Or just renting? Because it's a badass lens for sure! I'm looking at the 70-200 f/4 on the Canon side.

Great Shot maxx, quite sharp.

http://i409.photobucket.com/albums/p...py1024x768.jpg

Camera: Nikon D40
ISO: 200
Shutter: 1/40
Aperture: f/10
Focal Length: 55mm
Exposure Bias: 0
Lens: Nikkor 18-55 3.5-5.6 DX II ED VR

Camera: Canon Digital Rebel XTi
ISO: 200
Shutter: 1/80
Aperture: f/2.8
Focal Length: 100mm
Exposure Bias: None
Lens: EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM

http://dl.getdropbox.com/u/2028/Xtre...hy/HI_0965.jpg

Dave_Sz: I think they were just about the same distance from the lens, I tried to make sure they would both be sharp, but with the shallow DOF from the wide aperture, part of the candle may have been slightly out of focus.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Soulburner

Maxx that's a good shot but overexposed :p

---

I actually had it at -1/3 EV. For some reason when its cloudy the D300 wants to overexpose most shots. Not sure why. I turned down the EV in NX2 and lip was still washed out so I left it alone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nate P.

Did you buy that 70-200 Maxxx? Or just renting? Because it's a badass lens for sure! I'm looking at the 70-200 f/4 on the Canon side.

---

lol. No I don't own it. I just rented it for the weekend. Its the lens I rent when I go to the zoo or wild animal park.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ANP !!!

Great Shot maxx, quite sharp.

thankyou, but it could have been sharper. The poor lighting from the clouds forced me to push the ISO and use slow shutter speeds.

---

Here is another from the same day

D300
70-200VR F2.8 @ 200mm
1/60 exposure time
-1/3 EV
ISO 220

Another shot marred by the poor lighting causing slow shutter speeds. For this one I should have gone with a higher ISO and faster shutter, but it was a candid photo that I got when taking photos of the California Condor.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/maxxxracer/3112936247/

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3272/...7d83769b_b.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Soulburner

Maxx that's a good shot but overexposed :p

---

Just a tad bit. I would also sharpen up he eye a bit and up the contrast a tad...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave_Sz

Just a tad bit.

---

Between .5-.75 stops I would guess.

http://i409.photobucket.com/albums/p...py1024x768.jpg

Camera: Nikon D40
ISO: 800
Shutter: 1/40
Aperture: f/5.6
Focal Length: 55mm
Exposure Bias: -0.7
Lens: Nikkor 18-55 f/3.5-5.6G EDII VR

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave_Sz

Just a tad bit. I would also sharpen up he eye a bit and up the contrast a tad...

---

Sharpening wont really help. It looks a bit soft due to camera/bird shake. Most likely the bird because the lens has VR and I have a pretty steady hand. As to the contrast, yes it looks "better" with more contrast, but I was keeping to reality which had much less contrast. In the sunlight it would have looked alot better but sadly I was in the rain.

wow, some amazing shots these last couple days guys :clap: :up:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MaxxxRacer

Sharpening wont really help.

---

Of course it would. Camera shake or not, unsharp mask will still help...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave_Sz

Of course it would. Camera shake or not, unsharp mask will still help...

---

Unsharp Mask is ancient.

Use Smart Sharpen. Believe it or not, it can even make out of focus, camera shake, or motion blur shots much better.

Set it to Lens Blur, More Accurate, amount 100 at .2-.5 pixels.

http://img56.imageshack.us/img56/3580/dsc0159yf1.jpg
http://img56.imageshack.us/img56/dsc...jpg/1/w717.png

Camera: Nikon D40X
ISO: 100
Shutter: 1/20
Aperture: f/5.3
Focal Length: 46mm
Exposure Bias: 1/3
Lens: Nikon 18-55 3.5-5.6 II ED (D40 Kit)

I tried shooting a basketball game for a friend, and here is one of the shots I got while messing around with wide angle perspective...

D70s
ISO 1000
18-70 f/3.5-4.5 @ 18mm
f/3.5
1/200

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v2...allresized.jpg

Canon 20D
Ef 24mm f/2.8

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3178/...23c0aeeb8a.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Soulburner

Unsharp Mask is ancient.

Use Smart Sharpen. Believe it or not, it can even make out of focus, camera shake, or motion blur shots much better.

Set it to Lens Blur, More Accurate, amount 100 at .2-.5 pixels.

---

I know about it. I've used it a few times. Not a big fan of it though.

Here is another for today.

Camera: Nikon D300
Exposure: 0.008 sec (1/125)
Aperture: f/2.8
Focal Length: 200 mm
ISO Speed: 200
Exposure Bias: -1/3 EV

http://www.flickr.com/photos/maxxxracer/3114771281/

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3262/...5a9ae611_b.jpg

Well Smart Sharpen is currently among the top sharpening algorithms available today. It is part of my batch process that I tied into LR2. No image gets resized without then being sharpened since they become so soft.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Soulburner

Well Smart Sharpen is currently among the top sharpening algorithms available today. It is part of my batch process that I tied into LR2. No image gets resized without then being sharpened since they become so soft.

---

I know its the best and sometimes it does great things but I have had alot of instances where it ends up sharpening OOF objects and it just annoys me. I tested it out on the photo below last night and it worked out great at .3 pixel 60% lens blur, but on other photos of mine it didnt do what I wanted it to. Usually I think the photo is sharp enough so I dont bother with trying to fix it. That said I will give the two bird photos a shot when I get home tonight.


http://www.flickr.com/photos/maxxxracer/3115558114/
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3240/...e0b14e72_b.jpg

I know what you mean about OOF areas - that is something that I wish we had a better way of dealing with. Right now you need to sharpen each image manually with a mask so you only get the area you want. On certain images, this can be a lot of work. At least when I use 100 or less at .2-.5 pixels it doesn't have a drastic effect and most people wouldn't notice the difference in the background since they never saw it before anyway. However, it can make a world of difference for the subject of the photo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Soulburner

I know what you mean about OOF areas - that is something that I wish we had a better way of dealing with. Right now you need to sharpen each image manually with a mask so you only get the area you want. On certain images, this can be a lot of work. At least when I use 100 or less at .2-.5 pixels it doesn't have a drastic effect and most people wouldn't notice the difference in the background since they never saw it before anyway. However, it can make a world of difference for the subject of the photo.

---

Ya, im just too lazy to make a mask. I did it to do NR on the background of a giraffe photo I did at night, but for smart sharpen I cant justify the time spent to make a mask and then do smart sharpen on the mask.