Neowin Digital Gallery - Yearly Edition 2011


Recommended Posts

Canon 1D M3

Canon 5D

Canon S90

24-70 F2.8L

70-200 F2.8L IS

35 F1.4L

85 F1.2L

Nikon D3

Nikon D700

Nikon D100

Nikon F5

14-24 F2.8

24-120 F3.5-5.6 VR

80-200 F2.8 ED

50 F1.8 D

50 F1.4 AIS

50 F1.4 AFS

105 F2.8 Micro

200 F2.0 VR

Leica M6

Leica M9

15 Heliar

35 Summicron IV

75 Summarit

Hasselblad 500 C/M

80mm F2.8 Planar Chrome

o my!!!!!!!!! overkill???

thats looks like his entire fortune :p

Took this at the weekend.

Raw then converted from NEF to DNG, then saved as JPEG, max compression.

Cropped a bit, sharpened and levels and colours adjusted in Photoshop. Think it looks good.

Manual Exposure, f4.0, ISO 100, 1/400, 70mm (105mm)

Such a wee cutie!

EDIT: Although I am kind of annoyed that her jacket is more in focus than her face. This is my first attempt at manual focus too!

post-130223-0-42368400-1306780860.jpg

Took this at the weekend.

Raw then converted from NEF to DNG, then saved as JPEG, max compression.

Cropped a bit, sharpened and levels and colours adjusted in Photoshop. Think it looks good.

Manual Exposure, f4.0, ISO 100, 1/400, 70mm (105mm)

Such a wee cutie!

EDIT: Although I am kind of annoyed that her jacket is more in focus than her face. This is my first attempt at manual focus too!

Yeah, focus is definitely off, crop is a bit odd too, make sure to focus on the eyes specifically.

Some chromatic aberration which could have been fixed up in photoshop.

Av. de los Empresarios

5781866886_ba567465f5_z.jpg

View of part of Av. de los Empresarios from a balcony. Zapopan, M?xico.

Date Taken: 2011-05-17 08:31:24

Camera Make: SONY

Camera Model: DSLR-A200

Lens: 18-50mm F2.8-4.5

Focal Length: 18 mm

Mode: Manual

Aperture: f/8.0

Exposure Time: 0.002 sec (1/500)

ISO: 200

Centring the subject usually works best when it's symmetric - not in your case. Also too much empty space. Have you tried shooting it vertically and including more of the stem?

Black halo around the flower. Did you tonemap it?

Bump up the contract - looks somewhat flat at the moment and a bit underexposed as well.

Overall it has a very soft look. If you were going for a macro shot, then soft isn't your best option.

Ditch the watermark.

Centring the subject usually works best when it's symmetric - not in your case. Also too much empty space. Have you tried shooting it vertically and including more of the stem?

Black halo around the flower. Did you tonemap it?

Bump up the contract - looks somewhat flat at the moment and a bit underexposed as well.

Overall it has a very soft look. If you were going for a macro shot, then soft isn't your best option.

Ditch the watermark.

1) I know about shooting vertically but I was shooting at the object.. I am not worrying about vertically or the stem for now. I just want to show the focus on object and blurry background.

2) Black halo: No I didn't do a thing to the photo. It is a wood-type fence behind the flower.

3) I will try and adjust and see how it comes out.

4) I have not added filter or changed in any graphical editor.

5) Don't worry about the watermark. Everyone has entitled to their preferences on the watermark addition. I have not seen you complain about moonman's or bubbabyte's watermarks.. (or anyone else for that matter.) Besides, I don't mind if you add your watermark onto your photos. It doesn't bother me.

The black halo might be from jpg compression? Iunno, I usually export everything at 10/12 or higher.

There's a difference between the watermark you used, and the one moonman uses (can't remember bubba's right now). If you really want one, try a smaller less intrusive one.

That background is a red/black plant behind the flower... not the fence... my bad... which I forgot about the red/black plant that is sitting behind the flower that I was aiming at... I was thinking that I was shooting at the flower, facing at the fence... I was actually shooting in the big plant's direction.

Here it is:

post-277494-0-35127600-1306946501.jpg

What you think?

1) I know about shooting vertically but I was shooting at the object.. I am not worrying about vertically or the stem for now. I just want to show the focus on object and blurry background.

Well... shooting at Macro levels you shouldn't have to worry about blurring the background... It comes VERY easy, not enough DOF IMO... I would have stopped down to f/11 if you're anywhere near 1:1

As there is just not enough IN focus to really differentiate easily between what is and is not in focus, especially with these fuzzy guys!

a brilliant thunderstorm went past our place..

Here in Lahore the lights go out every 4 hours due to lack of electical power. Played it to my advantage. Used the darkness to take some sweet long exposure shots of the sky. My first time with lightning. some are 5s 400ISO F8 others are 25s 200ISO F8 there is no infinity focus marker on the kit lens its a pain to focus in complete darkness.

And i also realised how much i would love a wider lens. Didnt edit the pix except for cropping.

post-285248-0-13726700-1306963372.jpg

post-285248-0-70797500-1306963429.jpg

post-285248-0-49740300-1306963892.jpg

and my fav

post-285248-0-00445600-1306963909.jpg

hey thank u :D

i still have a buy a tripod though.. Would try some astrophotography aswell after exams.

Sounds great! goodluck with exams!

5788192676_5f495a0ccf.jpg

DSC_0372 by Paulo Franco, on Flickr

5788192876_9857003c7b.jpg

DSC_0373 by Paulo Franco, on Flickr

5788193254_51476c0e24.jpg

DSC_0382 by Paulo Franco, on Flickr

^That one was tough, never tried shooting bugs while they flew in mid-air, they're hard to track, but I only had the camera on single focus point, that is why. Had to bump ISO to 1600, probably could have gotten away with less DOF. Can't wait to try again, this guy was pretty tiny though, so I was pretty close, hopefully I have something larger to work with next time!

Note: The first two images are around 1:1, no crop

there is no infinity focus marker on the kit lens its a pain to focus in complete darkness.

Im sure you can look this up somewhere, but this is just a guess. At F8, I'm guessing if you focus on something 75ft or further, everything beyond that'll be in focus. So maybe focus on the power lines and go from there?

I was in Vegas for the System of A Down concert a couple weekends ago. Took some pictures while I was out'n about. All taken with my Canon XS and 18-55mm kit lens.

5789282664_493ee300d7.jpg

IMG_3721 - Copy by intrinity1, on Flickr

5789211606_9f06e646ff.jpg

IMG_3735 by intrinity1, on Flickr

5788651719_6140a808bc.jpg

IMG_3683-3 by intrinity1, on Flickr

Took this last night while out for a walk with my wife and two wee ones.

f/11, 1/4000, ISO100, 31mm

Twearked levels, colours, shadows/highlights in Photoshop, cropped and rotated slightly to make it nice and straight, smart sharpen (lens blur) and finally, noise removal.

post-130223-0-56643200-1306997994.jpg

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • NVIDIA officially supports Ubuntu, as linked above with the GeForce NOW Hands on I did in collaboration with Paul Hill.
    • TO be clear I am not running linux today, however I keep thinking about it. And I want to make sure there are minimal obstacles if I decide to make that switch in the coming months.
    • Yes, I actually glossed over the Linux part from the OP. You could always go for a 9070 XT and if you really want to play Ray Traced games in the future, GeForce Now is pretty damn good on Linux https://www.neowin.net/news/nvidias-native-geforce-now-app-for-linux-bridges-the-gaming-gap-hands-on/
    • One reason it might be running hotter is dust build up within the cooling or perhaps the paste has dried out. You could always try repasting your old GPU and cleaning the cooler. Your experience in Linux will be much better with an AMD GPU; the performance in gaming is much closer to Windows than nVidia would be. I personally think on Windows, AMD drivers are junk.
    • I reviewed it back in March, but I didn't have a 5070 at the time https://www.neowin.net/reviews/amd-rx-9070-review-vs-rtx-5070-4070-and-rx-9070-xt-7800-xt--just-good-enough/ When I reviewed the 9070 I did have a 5070 to compare it against, so the scores are there for the 9070 XT. it outperforms the 5070 in raster, and is barely neck and neck in Ray Tracing. So it's better than a 5070 in everything but Ray Tracing where it is neck and neck, or just under. To be honest, the uplift from 3080 when it was new to the 9070 XT is not as great a step up. If you can find a used 4080 Super for around the same money, you would probably be better off, but if you only want to buy new then the 16GB 9070 XT is the best value for money in its category.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Proficient
      Eric Biran went up a rank
      Proficient
    • Dedicated
      Conjor earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Week One Done
      Windows Guy earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Dedicated
      Mark Spruce earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Collaborator
      conkir earned a badge
      Collaborator
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      479
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      252
    3. 3
      Steven P.
      72
    4. 4
      +Edouard
      69
    5. 5
      Skyfrog
      67
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!