The Photo Snob Thread
- Thread starter brisneyland
- Start date
Xplor
Likes Dirt
Hey Craig, the picture you put up on the beach with the long exposer i think it was page 1884. I love it. Though i want to know something.
To get that photo do you just take the photo with a long exposer to get the dreamy affect of the water crashing on the rocks. But how come the water in the foreground like the waves arent all blurry and dreamy, there nice and crisp?
Did you take another photo and like cut it in (don't know technical names, hopefully you guys know what im talking about.)
If you could let me know id really appreciate it
To get that photo do you just take the photo with a long exposer to get the dreamy affect of the water crashing on the rocks. But how come the water in the foreground like the waves arent all blurry and dreamy, there nice and crisp?
Did you take another photo and like cut it in (don't know technical names, hopefully you guys know what im talking about.)
If you could let me know id really appreciate it
AngoXC
Wheel size expert
At a guess, it's the one image. A few seconds is all you need to render wave motion as a blur, however, 'shorter' long exposures will still retain some detail with regards to motion. I dare say the exposure was only long enough for the one wave to wash over the rock platform where as in the background, you've got a lot more motion, hence why it's more 'dreamy'.
Not quite up there with Jase's but this is from my haul.
Fisheye at the shrine.
A fairly straight forward capture however getting perspective correct is a little more complicated. Took me ages!
AngoXC
Wheel size expert
Nikon 10.5mm f/2.8
Sam91
Likes Bikes
Hey all I have been having some practice with my new speedlight and was just wondering if I could get some feedback??
Down at the Kangaroo Point cliffs using one speedlight. Unfortunately I had to shoot Black and white as I need to get some gels for my flash . This is two shots blended in photoshop, one for the tree and one for the front of the car.
Shot one- YN-462 behind car up at trees
Shot two- YN-462 to camera left at front of the car
Thoughts?
Down at the Kangaroo Point cliffs using one speedlight. Unfortunately I had to shoot Black and white as I need to get some gels for my flash
. This is two shots blended in photoshop, one for the tree and one for the front of the car.Shot one- YN-462 behind car up at trees
Shot two- YN-462 to camera left at front of the car
Thoughts?
CraigS
Likes Dirt
Yeah it's just one shot. From memory it was 17mm 0.5sec f18 iso100. 0.3-0.3 is good enough to get that motion of the water crisp but "dreamy". Make sure you've got a good steady tripod because the waves are crashing around it.Hey Craig, the picture you put up on the beach with the long exposer i think it was page 1884. I love it. Though i want to know something.
To get that photo do you just take the photo with a long exposer to get the dreamy affect of the water crashing on the rocks. But how come the water in the foreground like the waves arent all blurry and dreamy, there nice and crisp?
Did you take another photo and like cut it in (don't know technical names, hopefully you guys know what im talking about.)
If you could let me know id really appreciate it
One form this morning, played around with my 70-200 2.8
JSPhoto
Likes Bikes and Dirt
Depends what and how your shooting... Anything past 200mm and your asking for trouble without some sort of optical stabilization.
Unlearn
Likes Dirt
Right now, i'm tired and wiry, havn't been able to shoot, or ride, or anything else. Hopefully soon i'll be able to get back out.
Having said that, IS is a wonderful thing, I shot at 200mm at 1/20th sec and got a sharp shot with IS. IS is awesome for shooting anything stationary.
A faster aperture will do two things, it will help with camera/handshake, but will also help freeze motion. Your DOF will change accordingly too (as you probably know), which can be an advantage, and you'll have a little more flexibility with flash power, although I rarely need to open up that wide with flash, unless i'm after a particular DOF.
Now, food for thought - It's claimed IS is good for around 3 stops, so if you have a f/4 IS lens and a f/2.8 non-IS lens the 2.8 lens is only one stop faster than the f/4 lens. So for any given 'still' scene your two stops worse off with the faster aperture lens.
You could get the best of both worlds though, and get something like a 70-200L f/2.8 IS lens.
At the end of the day you have to weigh up what your use for the lens is. Don't forget theres the tripod/monopod option also.
All in all i'm a fan.
Andrew.
I don't understand your question, but i'll try and explain. Having IS OR a faster aperture are two different things, although they do relate in some ways. IS will only try to eliminate camera/handshake, using some gyro's and small motors inside the lens to act against the motion of the camera shake, meaning you will be able to get sharper shots at slower shutter speeds. Now the important bit - IT WILL NOT HELP FREEZE MOTION IN THE PHOTO, if someone is moving and your shooting at a slower shutter speed the IS will not compensate for the guy moving and keep him/her sharp.
Having said that, IS is a wonderful thing, I shot at 200mm at 1/20th sec and got a sharp shot with IS. IS is awesome for shooting anything stationary.
A faster aperture will do two things, it will help with camera/handshake, but will also help freeze motion. Your DOF will change accordingly too (as you probably know), which can be an advantage, and you'll have a little more flexibility with flash power, although I rarely need to open up that wide with flash, unless i'm after a particular DOF.
Now, food for thought - It's claimed IS is good for around 3 stops, so if you have a f/4 IS lens and a f/2.8 non-IS lens the 2.8 lens is only one stop faster than the f/4 lens. So for any given 'still' scene your two stops worse off with the faster aperture lens.
You could get the best of both worlds though, and get something like a 70-200L f/2.8 IS lens.
At the end of the day you have to weigh up what your use for the lens is. Don't forget theres the tripod/monopod option also.
Sam, I think you can do better than these two shots. The first shot is very flat, and I think you could have composed it better. The sand dune on the left is almost dead space. The second shot doesn't tell any story at all, and the subject (assuming its the graffiti) has been cropped almost entriely out, i'm not sure if theres a dude behind that beard. Cool colours though, and it's good to see you're enjoying the 40D!Loving the 40D
I'm diggin those church shots guys, awesome perspective and I like the exposures. Any way you can fix the horizon on yours Karnige?
All in all i'm a fan.
I like the way your heading with this shot, but theres two things that come to mind for me. First that the highlight/background on the right hand side of the frame is distracting, and secondly I feel there needs to be a little more seperation from the right hand side of the car and the background, maybe get another light back there?
Looking nice man, and I'm a fan of those sunrise shots a couple of pages back also.
Andrew.
Last edited:
AngoXC
Wheel size expert
As a rule of thumb, one wants to maintain a shutter speed of above the inverse of the focal length of the lens. So, if you're shooting at 200mm, then you want to maintain a shutter speed of above 1/200th sec. Slower than you are risking hand shake as telephoto lenses typically amplify small hand movements (not always depending on how steady you are but it's a nice rule of thumb).
As Jase quite rightly pointed out, IS is best used here since it means you can use longer lenses in conditions where it was previously too dark or where a monopod/support was required. This is partly why wide angle lenses/mid range zooms don't require IS as the focal length as much less of a pronounced effect on hand shake etc. The exception here is your cheaper kit lenses which are optically slower, hence the addition of IS means that they can maintain relative low light performance to (or even improve upon) constant-aperture counterparts.
In short, Jaydawgz, it all comes down to the lens you're after. If it's a telephoto/zoom lens with a focal length over 70mm, then I'd probably be taking it (IS) into consideration. If it's a professional-grade constant-aperture zoom with a smaller zoom ratio (zoom range), then I'd say it's a welcome addition but not overly necessary. Finally, if it's a cheaper kit lens with a relatively large zoom ratio (ie. 15-85mm), then I'd say it's something to go for.
One thing to keep in mind however is that when considering IS vs faster aperture, the optically slower IS lenses will not be able to produce the same depth-of-field as the faster options -such the case when considering say the 24-70 f/2.8L vs 24-105 f/4L etc though such differences are more pronounced on a FF camera.
Hope that helps.
Last edited:
Haven't been keeping track of this thread at all over the last few months. Really blown away with some of the stuff you guys are pumping out.
Anyways I picked up my DSLR for the first time in what feels like ages and went down to the city jumps with Lewis.
I like the compostition of the shot but the shadows on his arm/face and landing are really off putting. Interested in hearing some thoughts!
Anyways I picked up my DSLR for the first time in what feels like ages and went down to the city jumps with Lewis.
I like the compostition of the shot but the shadows on his arm/face and landing are really off putting. Interested in hearing some thoughts!
for those about to rock
Likes Dirt
Personally, I don't like the jump on the right side of the frame. My eye seems drawn to that more than the rider. Another flash on the lander and trees might have helped. Just my opinion, although it might not be one that is of some use.Haven't been keeping track of this thread at all over the last few months. Really blown away with some of the stuff you guys are pumping out.
Anyways I picked up my DSLR for the first time in what feels like ages and went down to the city jumps with Lewis.
I like the compostition of the shot but the shadows on his arm/face and landing are really off putting. Interested in hearing some thoughts!
+1 to that. Haven't been posting or photog'ing as much as i'd like due to year 12, but i've been lurking, and the amount of inspiration one gets is amazing, makes me so eager to get some great pics when i get a chance.