Photography Your Best Photography
- Thread starter Matt
- Start date
Michael
Torque Titan
Well guys I took this today. This is right around the corner of my house.
Tell me what you think
View attachment 9be0188871dce41bc8230afa98fd3402.jpg
View attachment 9092ca0204a356d17d700c0480553550.jpg
My favorite!
Another one I like, but it is not straightened out
I realized that I had a problem with them today. I had my F stop pretty much in the highest because I wanted depth of field, ISO at 100, and Shutter was pretty fast. The apeture was the problem. I can see that I had no depth of field though....I don't know why because the Apeture was at about F3.8
Whatever, just tell me what you think.
Tell me what you think
View attachment 9be0188871dce41bc8230afa98fd3402.jpg
View attachment 9092ca0204a356d17d700c0480553550.jpg
My favorite!
Another one I like, but it is not straightened out
I realized that I had a problem with them today. I had my F stop pretty much in the highest because I wanted depth of field, ISO at 100, and Shutter was pretty fast. The apeture was the problem. I can see that I had no depth of field though....I don't know why because the Apeture was at about F3.8
Whatever, just tell me what you think.
NevadaJack
In Memoriam
Nice shots BMW...you also have an "eye." Looks like you did some nice PS tweaks also.BMWFREAK said:
F/3.8 is pretty wide open and would not produce any appreciable DOF. Bump up the ISO and stop down to about F/8 or F/11. What camera are you using and can you set Aperture or Shutter priority? Shoot at Aperture priority at that f/8 or f/11 and if the shutter speed is less than 1/125 or so, bump up the ISO.
NevadaJack
In Memoriam
Thanks Roberto. Those are really domesticated ducks...they live on tourist pop corn and bread. There are also some huge carp and bass in and around the docks. But I miss the wildlife of South Carolina...not really a lot to shoot locally near LV.Roberto said:
Here is one of the carp or bass...don't know which..
NevadaJack
In Memoriam
BMWFREAK said:
Thanks...here is another one in which the sun on the water has distorted the fish and it looks like something alien...
NevadaJack
In Memoriam
Thanks BMW...these were with the Canon EF-S 17-85mm IS. The first one 1/500 @ f/5.6, ISO 400 @ 64mm. The second one 1/160 @ f/11, ISO 400 @ 47mm. Probably shot on Auto.BMWFREAK said:
NevadaJack
In Memoriam
I know it was sunny (it always is sunny here..BMWFREAK said:
Probably shooting something else where I needed higher shutter speed and forgot to change it. Nice thing about shooting in auto is that the camera compensates for the conditions and settings. I normally shoot in Aperture Priority at 200 ISO and set the f-stop to what I want for DOF or effects amd let the camera decide the speed. Really depends on the conditions and subject and whether I remember to check all my settings...
SDNR
Kraftwagen König
I agree with BMWFREAK, this is a beautiful photo Jack ...your Canon lenses offer great clarity, sharpness, and excellent colour rendition -- I have owned an EOS in the past and was impressed with the optical quality of the lenses. I am also amazed at the purity of the water you are photographing there ...is is clean enough to drink? ...maybe that was a dumb question.
Also, BMWFREAK, those architectural photos are very good too ...but I am interested in the place itself ....what is it? (or should that be, what was it?) it looks like it was once a very grand old building.
Also, BMWFREAK, those architectural photos are very good too ...but I am interested in the place itself ....what is it? (or should that be, what was it?) it looks like it was once a very grand old building.
Michael
Torque Titan
Roberto said:
I knew that YOU were going to ask this. I do not have a lot of information on the place but I can say the following about where I live. I live in Coral Gables, and Coral Gables was founded for pretty much a group of elites just like West Palm Beach was. However, they wanted this Mediterranean feel and that is why you have this Spanish/Meditteranean feel to it. I am not sure if these are cometemporary man made structures or they are old and served a purpose. There are many places like these around Coral Gables. This particular spot is very popular for Wedding photography and photography with couples as a whole. I was laughing, because the other day there was really bad weather(sooooo cloudy) and there was a girl that was having her pictures taken. I thought to myself, that must be a really bad photographer to not have rescheduled the shooting for a brighter day.
Here is a link of the city: www.coralgables.com
Also from here:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coral_Gables,_Florida
"The city was developed by George Merrick in the 1920s. The city's architecture is almost entirely Mediterranean"
The place I took pictures is called Country Club Prado which was built in the 1920s. It serves as one of Coral Gables entrances.
Coral Gables also promotes the preservation of historical foundations. You can take a look at there list here: http://www.citybeautiful.net/CGWeb/landmarks.aspx
Also we have a "Historic Treasure in City Beautiful"--Venetian Pool. The water is sooooo cold.
http://www.venetianpool.com/
Here is the history: http://www.venetianpool.com/History.html
Some pictures:
View attachment 3cba02e6ae49246f472681a30acd1fb0.jpg
This is taken at the biltmore(I did not take it)
The Biltmore
I hope that helps.
NevadaJack
In Memoriam
Thanks Roberto...Lake Mead is the largest man-made lake in the country and is a resevoir for Las Vegas and the prime source of it's drinking water. The water is pumped to the treatment plants in LV. It is extremely clear though.Roberto said:
NevadaJack
In Memoriam
Nice images Roberto...
Germaniac
Tarmac Traveler
Roberto! Nice images man, I saw your photo of a dog in a photo contest thread the other week and immediately thought you had a real eye - your photos I've seen have displayed an incredible sense of composition and deliberation - something I respect a great deal firstly due to the fact that photography is not a medium that easily lends itself to such a style, and secondly because my photos always seem to be that of the spontaneous kind - not always a good thing.
I've used a variety of cameras over the years but I think most of the photos on here were taken on a Canon Powershot G3, hardly the most spectacular camera around but really solid and great image quality. Downfalls are basically its speed (quite slow to focus, record image, etc) and inability to truly control the camera's functions (like, it's got a fully manual mode, but its interface and controls are so un-userfriendly as to render it basically defunct). I'm currently using an old Pentax K1000 SLR, fully old-school, fully manual... cheap as chips it was but image quality is quite stunning. Very basic camera. Dad purchased a Canon 20D DSLR at the start of the year with some nice lenses (17mm-85mm w/ IS, plus a DO 70-300mm w/ IS) and I'm using that a little too.
There's two ways I've used to desaturate parts of coloured photos (both with Photoshop). Firstly with a simple sponge tool; select it to desaturation (as opposed to saturation, which richens the colours) then blot out the bits you want desaturated (obviously zooming close in and being very careful around the edges between colour and b&w). Secondly, as you mentioned, you can use a lasso tool, but i would steer clear of the magnetic lasso as though it is significantly quicker it generally leaves very messy lines (especially with something like hair, for example - it's ok with straight blocks or square lines, for example on a car) which means you're basically wasting your time - unless you dont care if it looks sloppy. The slower but cleaner alternative, of course, is zooming right in and just selecting the areas manually using the polygonal (sp?) lasso - using the left mouse button in conjuncting with the ctrl and alt keys (add to selection, detract from selection). once you've selected the area you want to keep in colour, simply invert selection then hit ctrl+shift+u (desaturate). The problem then becomes the fact that usually the line between colour and b&w is very obvious: so what you do is go to (in the menu) select, modify selection, border, select a sensible pixel count, then add some gaussian blur to the border (between the colour and black and white). Does that make sense? Basically selecting the area, making it black and white, then blurring the lines between black and white and colour. To be honest it's alot easier using the manual desaturation sponge, I use it alot more.
Hope that helps!
Thanks, and sorry for the late replyEl Zorro said:
I've used a variety of cameras over the years but I think most of the photos on here were taken on a Canon Powershot G3, hardly the most spectacular camera around but really solid and great image quality. Downfalls are basically its speed (quite slow to focus, record image, etc) and inability to truly control the camera's functions (like, it's got a fully manual mode, but its interface and controls are so un-userfriendly as to render it basically defunct). I'm currently using an old Pentax K1000 SLR, fully old-school, fully manual... cheap as chips it was but image quality is quite stunning. Very basic camera. Dad purchased a Canon 20D DSLR at the start of the year with some nice lenses (17mm-85mm w/ IS, plus a DO 70-300mm w/ IS) and I'm using that a little too. There's two ways I've used to desaturate parts of coloured photos (both with Photoshop). Firstly with a simple sponge tool; select it to desaturation (as opposed to saturation, which richens the colours) then blot out the bits you want desaturated (obviously zooming close in and being very careful around the edges between colour and b&w). Secondly, as you mentioned, you can use a lasso tool, but i would steer clear of the magnetic lasso as though it is significantly quicker it generally leaves very messy lines (especially with something like hair, for example - it's ok with straight blocks or square lines, for example on a car) which means you're basically wasting your time - unless you dont care if it looks sloppy. The slower but cleaner alternative, of course, is zooming right in and just selecting the areas manually using the polygonal (sp?) lasso - using the left mouse button in conjuncting with the ctrl and alt keys (add to selection, detract from selection). once you've selected the area you want to keep in colour, simply invert selection then hit ctrl+shift+u (desaturate). The problem then becomes the fact that usually the line between colour and b&w is very obvious: so what you do is go to (in the menu) select, modify selection, border, select a sensible pixel count, then add some gaussian blur to the border (between the colour and black and white). Does that make sense? Basically selecting the area, making it black and white, then blurring the lines between black and white and colour. To be honest it's alot easier using the manual desaturation sponge, I use it alot more.
Hope that helps!
El Zorro
Quattro Commander
Thanks for the explanation Germaniac!! 
I like experimenting in Photoshop, but I haven't come to the level that I understand all the functions and possibilities. It's a slow learning curve, basically because I don't spend enough time discovering the program. I've made a couple of pictures in the past with desaturated parts, in which I used the 'magnetic lasso tool' very carefully in order to have a clear separation between coloured and non-coloured parts (see the two clowns on a picture I posted in this thread). But as you say, it's very difficult to do this in a good way (hair is indeed a difficult part), so I only did this trick with objects that have a clear outline, and even then the border could be very rough (result: something good, but nothing exceptional). I'm definitely gonna try your methods, and take all the time that is needed to obtain the perfect picture. Expect more Photoshop-related questions from me in the future 
BTW NevadaJack, the picture of the 'flying fish' is very very nice and sharp. I also like the picture from Roberto with the trees in the blue sky.
Oh, and before I forget this: I bought a little tripod for my camera
I like experimenting in Photoshop, but I haven't come to the level that I understand all the functions and possibilities. It's a slow learning curve, basically because I don't spend enough time discovering the program. I've made a couple of pictures in the past with desaturated parts, in which I used the 'magnetic lasso tool' very carefully in order to have a clear separation between coloured and non-coloured parts (see the two clowns on a picture I posted in this thread). But as you say, it's very difficult to do this in a good way (hair is indeed a difficult part), so I only did this trick with objects that have a clear outline, and even then the border could be very rough (result: something good, but nothing exceptional). I'm definitely gonna try your methods, and take all the time that is needed to obtain the perfect picture. Expect more Photoshop-related questions from me in the future BTW NevadaJack, the picture of the 'flying fish' is very very nice and sharp. I also like the picture from Roberto with the trees in the blue sky.
Oh, and before I forget this: I bought a little tripod for my camera
