So who's into photography?

[Petra]

I've owned my first camera for all of two weeks now, and become a complete (and no doubt irritating) shutterbug. I'm reading the camera's manual, I'm taking out books from the library, I'm prowling the internet looking for clues regarding exposure, aperture, f stops, etc, etc. Fun stuff, and all totally new to me. (I've only ever used automatic compact cameras before, and they belonged to my sister.

Anyway, I thought perhaps if anyone else here were into a spot of photography, we could share pics and tips. (At this stage I personally have no tips to offer as I'm still at the leech/sponge stage of my development. But as soon as I know what I'm doing, I'll let you know. :D )

In the meantime, of the gazillion pictures I have taken over the last 14 days, here are a couple I'm rather happy with. If any of you more experienced photographers have any criticisms/critiques, don't hold back; I'm keen to learn ev'ry little thing. :study:


So you photographic hobbyists (or professionals), let's see yer snaps! :flashpic:

[curses]

:pickme: Me, me, me!!

I like your pictures, there's some nice, deep colors going on there. I also like the porcupine(?) shot, with the shallow depth of field. You also have a good eye for what will make an interesting photo :yup:

Here are some links I found pretty useful.
<a href="http://www.asc.upenn.edu/usr/cassidy/pix/2005/tree/index2.html">How to photograph a tree</a>. Not as boring as it sounds, it's a lesson in finding that perfect shot.
<a href="http://www.peekaboo.me.uk/">Boo's digital photography</a> has some great tutorials.
<a href="http://www.photo.net/learn/concerts/mirarchi/concer_i">Live music photography</a>A good lesson in concert photography.

What kind of camera did you get?

[Ari]

Yep.

Using my magical telepathic powers I'm going to say you got a Canon PowerShot Pro1, which seems to be quite a nice digicam. :)

[ceptimus]

I used to be keen years ago. I have a (film) SLR camera with several lenses. I don't use that anymore though.

I bought a Nikon Coolpix about 8 years ago when digital cameras were primitive and expensive. I got some good shots with the Nikon; even though it only has what now seems a laughable 1 million pixels, it does have a decent optical zoom.

I have a Sony mini-DV video camera that also takes reasonable stills onto a memory stick.

Last week I got my new toy, a Fuji S9500 (http://www2.fujifilm.co.uk/digital/cameras/s9500/index.php?&flash=8) but I've not had the time or weather to get any decent shots with it yet.

I like your shots, pepperspray and minus - I'm looking forward to seeing more. :yup:

[viscousmemories]

Those are some great photos, pepperspray. I'm impressed! I took a black&white photography class in my early teen years and loved it, but I much preferred the shooting to the darkroom work. Hence the magic of digital cameras. Maybe you'll inspire me to get into this too. :yup:

[curses]

I used to be keen years ago. I have a (film) SLR camera with several lenses. I don't use that anymore though.

I bought a Nikon Coolpix about 8 years ago when digital cameras were primitive and expensive. I got some good shots with the Nikon, even though it only has what now seems a laughable 1 million pixels, it does have a decent optical zoom.

I have a Sony mini-DV video camera that also takes reasonable stills onto a memory stick.

Last week I got my new toy, a Fuji S9500 (http://www2.fujifilm.co.uk/digital/cameras/s9500/index.php?&flash=8) but I've not had the time or weather to get any decent shots with it yet.

I like your shots, pepperspray and minus - I'm looking forward to seeing more. :yup:Danke :) Nikon Coolpix are good cameras, I was really suprised. Three of the four pics I posted were taken with a Nikon Coolpix, I think it's a 5600. The zoom is outstanding!

I like your new toy, though. Is the body heavy?

[Dingfod]

I took a brazillion pictures with my Pentax K1000 in the 80s, a few thousand in the 90s, etc. It's a hobby that dwindled down to a trickle. A few of mine that have been posted in the Gallery already:

http://www.freethought-forum.com/forum/gallery/files/3/6/100_0069.JPG

http://www.freethought-forum.com/forum/gallery/files/3/6/100_0165.JPG

http://www.freethought-forum.com/forum/gallery/files/3/6/scan0004.jpg

[freemonkey]

I love photography. I'm not so great at it, but I figure if I have a good enough eye and take enough pics, I get lucky now and then.

Just a couple pet snaps I have on this computer...

[curses]

I really like that first pic, Dingfod. The dots (holes?) make for an interesting perspective.

Freemonkey, I love the first pic of yours, too! The reflection off the wet sand is really nice. Cute pets :)

[Ari]

The best recommendation is to just play with your camera, which it sounds like you have been. It's even better now with digital, you don't pay for every shot you take. The money I've saved in developing costs has paid for my digital.
Experiment with the controls, such as take multiple shots of an object while increasing the f-stop from lowest to highest. Although find rough running water or splashing water and take multiple shots while changing the shutter speed from highest to lowest. You might understand what that will do but nothing beats doing it yourself and then seeing the results.

A semi-recent mushroom picture,

[viscousmemories]

Wow, you guys are all really good. I need to spend more time browsing the gallery. :blush:

[The Jesus Lawyer]

nice pics! i like pics! i have pics in the gallery, mostly under michael1111.

[Legs]

Hi pepperspray :wave: I especially love the first two photos you posted, they are almost kind of haunting.

I like to take pics of anything :) No tips, I am not that good at it.

[The Jesus Lawyer]

one piece of advice...try taking all your pics using the optical zoom, not digital. digital zoom is not a true zoom. an optical zoom uses the lens itself to bring the pic closer, while digital zoom simply magnifies a picture over and over, thus losing quality. we have a canon 2.2 megapixel camera that we paid a lot for many years ago. i can't blow the pics up too much, but because i always stayed within digital zoom, they still turned out really good, even at a low megapixel rating...

ceptimus- that is a good camera you got. our p&s is a fujis5200 and we love it. we are going out and finally buying a digital slr, either a nikon d70 or maybe an olympus e1pro. i have a minolta slr at home, but digital is just so easy. fuck that purist shit :P

michael :)

[Plant Woman]

Hey now, don't diss the purist. I am one that had to be drug kicking and screaming into the digital age. Still feels weird not to pay out big bucks to the labs weekly. I had to become a pro in order to feed my habit. Although now I don't sell as many photos as I used to I am amazed how the industry has changed even over the last few years when digital wasn't being used in many of the mags. I sold my first digital image a few months back to Fine Gardening mag and hope to have some more in the future.

Pepperspray, images are looking good!

[The Jesus Lawyer]

ok ok...i wont diss the purists :)

[Plant Woman]

Here's an article (http://www.sbccphoto.org/show_tip.asp?ID=5) about composition you might like to read.

[ceptimus]

I'm not convinced by that 'rule of thirds' stuff. Seems too simplistic to me. I can see that having the main object of interest dead centre is a bit too obvious, but why thirds? Why not fifths or sevenths? Who invented this rule anyhow?

[Ari]

Well it's not a stead fast rule. It's based on the golden ratio, which is thought to be pleasing to the eye. It also provides a quick reminder to not put the focus of a scene dead center, off centering it can add life to an image. Although sometimes symmetry is better.

[Sauron]

Cool. I just got a new toy (http://www.dpreview.com/news/0602/06022111canons3is.asp) yesterday.

I had one of its ancestors. (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canons1is/) The earlier camera is great, but I wanted something with higher pixel resolution and better video ability.

I'm really impressed with the photos displayed so far. If I want to keep up, I am apparently going to have to -- *sigh* -- read the manual and take this camera off the "auto focus" option.

[Plant Woman]

Who invented this rule anyhow?

Greeks, and cept you might like it because it is based in mathmatics. Who'da thunk it—composition in art based on math.

[Dingfod]

I have this model Sony, it's nothing special really, 5 million pixels, but it wasn't very expensive either ($349 at Best Buy):

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/images/sony_dsch1.gif

A lot of my digital photos were taken with it's ancestor, a Sony Mavica (2.1 million pixels)(1.44 MB 3-1/2" floppy disk)($799 in 1999), which I now keep in my locker at work:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/images/sony_fd83.gif

It's still a very good camera, but lacks the 1GB of Memory Stick that the newest one has.

[Dingfod]

The old Mavica still takes a good photo:

http://www.freethought-forum.com/forum/gallery/files/3/6/MVC-011S.JPG

[The Jesus Lawyer]

I'm not convinced by that 'rule of thirds' stuff. Seems too simplistic to me. I can see that having the main object of interest dead centre is a bit too obvious, but why thirds? Why not fifths or sevenths? Who invented this rule anyhow?

it is simplistic. it is also a standard, one i used when i was a television camera operator. when i take still pictures i use my own imaginary grid...whatever works to make a good pic, i guess :)

michael :)

[Johnny Pneumatic]

Oh my, yes, I'm into photography. :yup: Graphic Arts major, woot! I'm too sleepy to go searching for them now, but I'll try to get some links to my digital within a few days. None of my film stuff(which is a fair amount of my work) you'll be able to see, because I've not gotten off my lazy ass to scan them in. I'll do that this Fall at college or something.

Ding, that's a cool photo with the sky and black dots. :yup:

[Dingfod]

Ding, that's a cool photo with the sky and black dots. :yup:Thanks, it's the top part of windshield of our Chevy Trailblazer I took while waiting for my daughter's flag corps practice to be over.

[Sauron]

I have this model Sony, it's nothing special really, 5 million pixels, but it wasn't very expensive either ($349 at Best Buy):

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/images/sony_dsch1.gif

A lot of my digital photos were taken with it's ancestor, a Sony Mavica (2.1 million pixels)(1.44 MB 3-1/2" floppy disk)($799 in 1999), which I now keep in my locker at work:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/images/sony_fd83.gif

It's still a very good camera, but lacks the 1GB of Memory Stick that the newest one has.

My first digital camera was also a Sony
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0002/s70.jpg

But I realized that some of the pictures I was taking were too good; they look like the colors had been artificially enhanced and then airbrushed. See here for an example:

http://www.freethought-forum.com/forum/gallery/files/3/5/9/rainier_in_winter.jpg

I borrowed a friend's Canon, and was amazed at how true-to-life the colors were.

That's when I realized that the just-perfect world of Hello Kitty was guiding Sony's design team. They were so focused on making everyone feel like a success with a digital camera that they were oversaturating the colors and applying a smoothing algorithm to make every picture look artificially perfect.

No thanks. So I switched to Canon, and was pleasantly surprised to see it faithfully photographed whatever I saw, without the additional color enhancements:

http://www.freethought-forum.com/forum/gallery/files/3/5/9/IMG_0174.JPG

[Petra]

I like your pictures, there's some nice, deep colors going on there. I also like the porcupine(?) shot, with the shallow depth of field. You also have a good eye for what will make an interesting photo

Thank you! :vibes:

And thanks for the links, minus. They look very informative, and I will be going over them tonight. I really wanted to take my camera to Nashville Pussy, but was concerned about having to look after it while moshing wit'da punks. In hindsight, I still don't quite know if I should have taken it with me or not, as I was close enough to have maybe scored some great pics, but then I couldn't have partied as hard as did. You win some, you lose some.

Of the pics you've posted, I particularly like the b&w one. The perspective makes for an interesting shot. The building looks kind of haunted. Are those headstones lined up there? Freaky place.

It's raining here now, but next clear night, with a good moon, I'm heading down a nearby creepy old cemetary to take some night shots. If I can muster the courage, that is! :spooksho:


Using my magical telepathic powers I'm going to say you got a Canon PowerShot Pro1, which seems to be quite a nice digicam.

Yup. In my naivety, I bid for it thinking it was a true dSLR, but it's not. I'm not too dissappointed, though, as it's still a camera that will teach me a great deal about photography, and I'm lovin' it! The much covetted Olympus E-500 was just too pricey at an entry level for me. But in a year or three, I hope to upgrade to a proper dSLR. :cool:


ceptimus - I look forward to seeing some photos from you. That's a really nice camera you have. :thumbsup:

viscousmemories - thanks for the encouragement, and get snapping! Especially seeing as you took a course, an' all. Don't waste it - dust off that old camera and talk a walk outside. :D

Dingfod - You have a good eye. I totally love that dots one, it plays tricks on my eyes. I can't quite work out which part of the picture was closest to the camera. Very cool, and very original.

I also love those big bare branches against the grey sky and how the nakedness of the tree contrasts against the lush green of the trees in the background.

And that coastal pic: it could be here! I think you've been lying to me, and that you visited the Eastern Bay of Plenty while I wasn't looking! :D

I figure if I have a good enough eye and take enough pics, I get lucky now and then.

:yup: That's my philosophy. And the best thing about digital, is that you can do that without running into great expense processing rolls and rolls of film, looking for the one great capture.

The dog running on the beach is one of those great captures. Just wonderful. As for you cat, I think it has an ego problem. Seems to think she's some kind of Egyptian Queen, or something. Love it. :D

Ari - That mushroom picture is fantastic. You framed it nicely, and the detail is just great. A very 'saleable' pic, I think. :yup:

TJL - a photograph of a walk bridge you placed in the gallery really caught my eye the other day. I commented on it. It was a fantastic shot. :bow:

Legs - Thanks! :smug:

Plant Woman - Thanks for the link and the nice comments. Your photos have been consistently among my favourites in the gallery. I'm not surprised at all that you sell them. They are truly stunning.

I'd like to do some macro photography of plants and insects close up, but I haven't been successful at that yet. :(

Ari - Another beautiful image. In all the time I've known you on the net, I had no idea you were such an artist!

More, more!

I am apparently going to have to -- *sigh* -- read the manual and take this camera off the "auto focus" option.

Yes, you are. Bite the bullet, take the plunge, just do it. We're here for you, man. We'll help you. :wink: :kiss:


I thought I'd try something different at Zoe's school concert, and set a longish exposure time and no flash to take the pics. This was mostly just so that the flash wouldn't go off every other second and annoy the hell out of the audience and distract the kids playing. The results were generally pretty awful, but I kinda like this one (and, of course, you whipper snappers that know stuff, tips, tricks, and critiques are always welcome. I've not photoshopped any of the images so far - just saved copies of the RAW files as jpegs for the web. Not even so much as cropped 'em.

[Dingfod]

Zounds! That is a great photo, pepperspray!

[Petra]

Thank you, Ding! Of the 200 odd pics that I took, that is the only one that is partly any good.

All hail Digital! :D

[JoeP]

Of the 200 odd pics that I took, that is the only one that is partly any good.

All hail Digital! :D
Exactly. Even in the olde days of film, the best photographers planned on taking several rolls to get one good shot.

[Petra]

Exactly. Even in the olde days of film, the best photographers planned on taking several rolls to get one good shot.

Yup. One of my best friends does evening classes for 35mm photography, mostly black and white. She's not a rich woman, so she really has to think about every shot she takes. We've been out together a couple of times to take photos, and I always feel bad that I can just snap away almost indiscriminantly, while she knows that in the few hours we have, she only has 24 opportunities to find something that will develop well. When I win the lotto, I'm buying her a new digital. :yup:


Sometime next week, we're heading over to the Karangahake Gorge (http://www.karangahakegorge.co.nz/) to take some photos. Hopefully, I'll have something good to post afterwards. :)

[Ari]

Yup. In my naivety, I bid for it thinking it was a true dSLR, but it's not. I'm not too dissappointed, though, as it's still a camera that will teach me a great deal about photography, and I'm lovin' it! The much covetted Olympus E-500 was just too pricey at an entry level for me. But in a year or three, I hope to upgrade to a proper dSLR. :cool:
Even so, I have a friend who does semiprofessional work and swears by his digicam. I bought an EOS DRebel, mainly because I have previous EOS equipment and it's great. Probably wont upgrade it till it dies or Canon makes a more significant upgrade then the XT.

And thanks.

It's raining here now, but next clear night, with a good moon, I'm heading down a nearby creepy old cemetary to take some night shots. If I can muster the courage, that is!
If you start getting into low light shots or just photography in general I would recommend getting a noise reduction plugin such as "neat image" or "noise ninja" which can kill a lot of noise at higher iso and allow for darker shots.

I thought I'd try something different at Zoe's school concert, and set a longish exposure time and no flash to take the pics.
I agree, I like it. I try to stay away from the onboard flash as much as possible. Not only does it give the photo that "flash" look, but it kills all the natural colors of the scene. I also don't like to annoy people with a bright flash and the dRebel also has an annoying feature that when the flash is up it strobes it as its auto-focus light.

[Petra]

Even so, I have a friend who does semiprofessional work and swears by his digicam.

Really? There is hope! :D

Do you know what he uses?

I bought an EOS DRebel, mainly because I have previous EOS equipment and it's great. Probably wont upgrade it till it dies or Canon makes a more significant upgrade then the XT.

The EOS's seem to be very popular cameras. I've been prowling around www.dpchallenge.com and www.betterphotos.com, and many of the pics are taken with EOS cameras. They really take some beautiful pictures. I aspire to such heights!


If you start getting into low light shots or just photography in general I would recommend getting a noise reduction plugin such as "neat image" or "noise ninja" which can kill a lot of noise at higher iso and allow for darker shots.

Thanks for the tip. I've downloaded Neat Image, so I'll play a bit with that later this evening. :)


I agree, I like it. I try to stay away from the onboard flash as much as possible. Not only does it give the photo that "flash" look, but it kills all the natural colors of the scene. I also don't like to annoy people with a bright flash and the dRebel also has an annoying feature that when the flash is up it strobes it as its auto-focus light.


Thanks. I really like the warmth of photos taken without a flash - if onbly the subjects would remain a little more still, though. The motion I caught in most of the images was just too much. But I'm living and learning, and it's great to have people like you and Debbie sharing your insights. Thank you. :vibes:


Rightio, I have to go entertain bored, rainy day kids now. I hope to see more pics from you when I return. :cool:


Ciao for now! :wave: :kiss:

[Plant Woman]

Thank you pepperspray for you kind comments.

Yup. One of my best friends does evening classes for 35mm photography, mostly black and white. She's not a rich woman, so she really has to think about every shot she takes. We've been out together a couple of times to take photos, and I always feel bad that I can just snap away almost indiscriminantly, while she knows that in the few hours we have, she only has 24 opportunities to find something that will develop well.

That reminds me of some of my old assignments from my least favorite prof, that I learned the most from. (Funny how that works, eh?) We are given one sheet of 4x5 film, and one sheet of 8X10 photo paper. We had to produce a perfect photo from just those two. I learned how to make each photo count having to do those assignments. Of course being a poor college student, I couldn't afford to burn film or paper.

Now with the digital, I still make every photo count, but I take far more images than I used to.

Oh another tip: a tripod is your best friend, use it for almost every serious photo you want to take.

Your photo of the children playing guitars is great. The blurred movement of their hands is not a problem for me because it is a blur caused by their movements and makes it feel authentic. There are times where blurred movement is preferred, as I think this one is. Only one thing I would have liked to see, is a little more room to the left of the child on the left. Sometimes it is good to give a little breathing room to a subject close to the edge that is facing the edge of an image.

As an instructor once told me, learn the rules first, so when you break them, you break them for a purpose, and you know what that purpose is for. I always say, learning the rules helps you hone your craft, your creativity lets you use the rules as a tool, or push their limits with a purpose.

[Waluigi]

I suck at taking pictures, though every once in a while, I get a good one. Here's a sampling (for every one of these, there are a couple hundred that aren't worth posting).

[Petra]

That reminds me of some of my old assignments from my least favorite prof, that I learned the most from. (Funny how that works, eh?) Yup. :laugh:
We are given one sheet of 4x5 film, and one sheet of 8X10 photo paper. We had to produce a perfect photo from just those two. I learned how to make each photo count having to do those assignments. Of course being a poor college student, I couldn't afford to burn film or paper. Wow! That's some serious discipline right there. :bow:

Oh another tip: a tripod is your best friend, use it for almost every serious photo you want to take.

I got one a few days ago! :D It's just a cheapie off trademe, but does the job. I'm taking it to Fiji with me, so I rillyrilly hope I manage some good shots over there.

Your photo of the children playing guitars is great. The blurred movement of their hands is not a problem for me because it is a blur caused by their movements and makes it feel authentic. There are times where blurred movement is preferred, as I think this one is. Only one thing I would have liked to see, is a little more room to the left of the child on the left. Sometimes it is good to give a little breathing room to a subject close to the edge that is facing the edge of an image.

Thank you! I like the blur of their hands too, but it was the only one to turn out so well. A very sweet violinist came out okayish, but the others are too much blur all over. I was trying to catch the girl just behind the boy in the front, as that's my lovely daughter. :cool:

As an instructor once told me, learn the rules first, so when you break them, you break them for a purpose, and you know what that purpose is for. I always say, learning the rules helps you hone your craft, your creativity lets you use the rules as a tool, or push their limits with a purpose.

Wise words indeed, and I will do my best. :)

[Petra]

...every once in a while, I get a good one. Here's a sampling (for every one of these, there are a couple hundred that aren't worth posting).

Even at 1000 to 1, that 1 makes it all worthwhile. :yup:


My favourites are definitely the cliff/coastline, the canoes on the water (great reflections of the clouds!), and the rainbow sunbeams over the trees and snow. They're really great, Waluigi! And I think your cat wants to hurt you. :giggle:

[Dingfod]

Debbie T's post reminds me that a photography class ruined me for life. Prior to the class, I just snapped shots of anything any time. I might get one or two really good photos out of a roll of film, but considering how many I shot, that was quite a few. After the class, I was constantly considering composition, waiting for just the right moment, etc. My rate of fire dropped to next to nothing, then before you know it, I started forgetting to take the camera places. I still don't take very many pictures.

[The Lone Ranger]

I'm quite the amateur photographer myself. In particular, I love to photograph wildflowers. I spend many of my weekends roaming the countryside in search of flowers that I don't have any good pictures of yet.

Of course, being the sort of person I am, I always carry a notepad and a guide to the vascular flora of whatever region I'm currently exploring in my camera bag. I make sure that every picture is carefully labeled; I include the date and the place where the photo was taken, and I make absolutely certain that I've properly identified the flower, which is why I always carry the floral guide along.


I also love landscapes, and have whole photo albums filled with pictures taken at places like Acadia, Great Smoky Mountains, and Yellowstone National Parks.

Aside from wildflowers, my favorite subjects are waterfalls. That's why I love my SLR; you simply can't get a good waterfall picture unless you can leave the shutter open for at least 1 second.


I have a really nice SLR that cost almost $1,000 when I bought it eight years ago (back when I had money). This one's an automatic (though I rarely use it on full auto), but I learned on an old manual Nikon K-1000, so I have a pretty decent understanding of the significance of such things as f-stops that I'd probably not have if I'd learned on an automatic.

If I could afford such a thing, I'd love to have a large-format camera for landscape photography.


I imagine that film photography will be practically extinct in another 10 years' time or so. When they make digital SLRs that can do all my camera can with the resolution that the best film offers, I'll happily switch to a digital camera, assuming I can afford to.

(Given how much I can spend on film and developing in a year, it might be a bargain!)


Cheers,

Michael

[Waluigi]

Thanks, pepperspray. The lighthouse picture is from Gay Head, on Martha's Vineyard. I took a few lighthouse pictures there, but that one was the best (although it wasn't my favorite lighthouse).

The cat is not mine, but rather, a cat that was hanging out around our house when we first bought it. If it was a nice cat, we would have taken it in. As you can see though, it didn't want anything to do with us.

[Dingfod]

The cat is not mine, but rather, a cat that was hanging out around our house when we first bought it. If it was a nice cat, we would have taken it in. As you can see though, it didn't want anything to do with us.It would probably love Michael (The Lone Ranger).

[freemonkey]

pepperspray, I love that pic of the kids playing their instruments.

I've been wanting to get back to this thread with some pics, but that would require hours of looking through them, going through disks, making decisions, maybe scanning older ones from film. Eh, too much work, not enough time at the moment.

About cameras. I've only ever had used SLRs that worked sometimes, with cobbled together lenses. My favorite was a 1970's Fuji with a light leak and a dented telephoto lens. It finally died shortly after we moved out here to WA. I have a couple other SLRs, but don't use them since I bought myself the last remaining available Nikon 4500 (http://www.digitalsecrets.net/secrets/nik4500.html) a couple years ago (my gift to myself for quitting smoking). Its nothing special, compared to what's available now, but its got a nifty swivel and takes nice macros.


I figure if I have a good enough eye and take enough pics, I get lucky now and then.

:yup: That's my philosophy.

And Photoshop. Don't forget about Photoshop.

I started getting into photography to shoot reference material to paint from.Then moved to using photos as a jumping off point for digital paintings.

[ceptimus]

I took my new camera for a walk today to try it out. All the snaps below were taken in the space of a twenty minute walk. None of this stuff is more than ten minutes from my house.

You can click on any of the pics to see a big version, but the big versions are BIG (so as to show off the camera's resolution). They're about 2MB each so you can zoom in and see the detail.


<a href=http://ceptimus.co.uk/freethought/images/2006_0607/birds_over_river.jpg><img src=http://ceptimus.co.uk/freethought/images/2006_0607/thumbs/birds_over_river.jpg></a>
I walked down the side of the River Arrow (it's small enough to walk across in places at this time of the year). There were some birds flitting about over the water. I could have used a faster shutter speed to freeze them, but I went for the slightly blurry look to show their movement.

<a href=http://ceptimus.co.uk/freethought/images/2006_0607/church_in_distance.jpg><img src=http://ceptimus.co.uk/freethought/images/2006_0607/thumbs/church_in_distance.jpg></a>
A bit further along the river you can see the church on the other side.

<a href=http://ceptimus.co.uk/freethought/images/2006_0607/church_sign.jpg><img src=http://ceptimus.co.uk/freethought/images/2006_0607/thumbs/church_sign.jpg></a>
I crossed the river to get some shots of the church. As you can see, it's quite old.

<a href=http://ceptimus.co.uk/freethought/images/2006_0607/church_tower.jpg><img src=http://ceptimus.co.uk/freethought/images/2006_0607/thumbs/church_tower.jpg></a>
Here's the tower.

<a href=http://ceptimus.co.uk/freethought/images/2006_0607/church_front_entrance.jpg><img src=http://ceptimus.co.uk/freethought/images/2006_0607/thumbs/church_front_entrance.jpg></a>
The front entrance. I like the old door and its lock.

<a href=http://ceptimus.co.uk/freethought/images/2006_0607/church_side.jpg><img src=http://ceptimus.co.uk/freethought/images/2006_0607/thumbs/church_side.jpg></a>
This is what the church looks like from one side.

<a href=http://ceptimus.co.uk/freethought/images/2006_0607/church_side_entrance.jpg><img src=http://ceptimus.co.uk/freethought/images/2006_0607/thumbs/church_side_entrance.jpg></a>
Here's the other side, with "trademan's entrance". I like the fancy stonework around the top of the doorway. You can see a spider's web on the side of the tomb, but I couldn't see the spider to take her photo.

<a href=http://ceptimus.co.uk/freethought/images/2006_0607/church_side_doorway.jpg><img src=http://ceptimus.co.uk/freethought/images/2006_0607/thumbs/church_side_doorway.jpg></a>
Another shot of the side entrance. If you click on this image, or the last one, you can zoom in and read the old gravestones. People had better names back then than they do nowadays.

<a href=http://ceptimus.co.uk/freethought/images/2006_0607/castle.jpg><img src=http://ceptimus.co.uk/freethought/images/2006_0607/thumbs/castle.jpg></a>
Here's a view of my house from across the fields. Actually, this is Studley Castle. It's not really a castle, it's a sort of show-off country estate built by a nouveau-riche guy back in the Victorian age (I think).

<a href=http://ceptimus.co.uk/freethought/images/2006_0607/pole.jpg><img src=http://ceptimus.co.uk/freethought/images/2006_0607/thumbs/pole.jpg></a>
This pole used to carry wires to some attractive old street lamps that lit the lane that leads to the church. But the wires have been missing for years now.

<a href=http://ceptimus.co.uk/freethought/images/2006_0607/wild_flower.jpg><img src=http://ceptimus.co.uk/freethought/images/2006_0607/thumbs/wild_flower.jpg></a>
Here's a wild flower (a poppy?) growing amid some thistles on the side of the road.

<a href=http://ceptimus.co.uk/freethought/images/2006_0607/ducks.jpg><img src=http://ceptimus.co.uk/freethought/images/2006_0607/thumbs/ducks.jpg></a>
I walked back across the road bridge over the Arrow, and there were some ducks messing about on the river below.

[Leesifer]

Very nice, cep. I love reading old gravestones.

[Plant Woman]

Another shot of the side entrance. If you click on this image, or the last one, you can zoom in and read the old gravestones. People had better names back then than they do nowadays.

I like this closeup a lot. What is "a relect to the above" as Sarah is said to be?

BTW, that poppy is an opium poppy—Papaver somniferum.

[The Lone Ranger]

I have some photos handy that I thought I'd scan in -- I do apologize for the low quality of the pictures, as I scanned the pictures themselves, rather than negatives or slides.

Anyone who didn't know me and were to go through my photo albums would quickly deduce that I love 3 things: 1.) wildflowers, 2.) mountains, and 3.) waterfalls.

Cheers,

Michael


Picture 01: Potentilla norvegica (Norwegian Cinquefoil)
Photographed at Kamiak Butte County Park, near Pullman, Washington
June 13, 2000

Picture 03: View from atop Kamiak Butte, looking East
Moscow Mountain, just across the border in Idaho, is visible on the horizon
July 16, 2000

Picture 05: Looking West from Freezout Saddle
St. Joe National Forest, Clearwater Range of the Rocky Mountains, near Clarkia, Idaho
July 30, 2000

Picture 06: Catelleja miniata (Scarlet Paintbrush)
Photographed at Freezout Saddle, St. Joe National Forest, near Clarkia, Idaho
July 30, 2000

Picture 07: Looking North from Freezout Saddle
St. Joe National Forest, Clearwater Range of the Rocky Mountains, near Clarkia, Idaho
July 30, 2000

Picture 08: Rana pretiosa (Spotted Frog)
Photographed on Moscow Mountain, near Moscow, Idaho
August 6, 2000

Picture 09: Geranium viscosissimum (Sticky Geranium)
Photographed at Wawawai County Park, near Colton, Washington
May 26, 2003

Picture 10: Castelleja hispida (Harsh Paintbrush)
Photographed atop Kamiak Butte, near Pullman, Washington
June 1, 2003

Picture 11: Moonrise, as seen near Pomeroy, Washington
November 26, 2004

Picture 12: Mount Rainier, as seen from White Pass
US Highway 12, near Yakima, Washington
December 23, 2004

[The Lone Ranger]

Another shot of the side entrance. If you click on this image, or the last one, you can zoom in and read the old gravestones. People had better names back then than they do nowadays.

I like this closeup a lot. What is "a relect to the above" as Sarah is said to be?


"Relict" means "survivor." It's a somewhat old-fashioned usage that you rarely hear nowadays, but in the context, it would mean "Widow (Survivor) of the above (Ebenezer)."

Cheers,

Michael

[Sauron]

My Canon Powershot S3 just arrived. :yup:

I've updated my volume in the Members Gallery with several (downsized) examples of the photos; i.e., I didn't want to post 2.3 MB files, so they've all been shrunk to 1/3 size.

Snail (http://www.freethought-forum.com/forum/gallery/files/3/5/9/s3_snail.jpg)
Spiderweb (http://www.freethought-forum.com/forum/gallery/files/3/5/9/s3_spiderweb_427854.jpg)
Berry (http://www.freethought-forum.com/forum/gallery/files/3/5/9/s3_berry.jpg)
Yellow pansies. (http://www.freethought-forum.com/forum/gallery/files/3/5/9/s3_pansies.jpg)
Lake Wenatchee (http://www.freethought-forum.com/forum/gallery/files/3/5/9/lake_wenatchee.jpg)
Green pool on the river. (http://www.freethought-forum.com/forum/gallery/files/3/5/9/green_pool.jpg)
Clouds over Leavenworth (http://www.freethought-forum.com/forum/gallery/files/3/5/9/leavenworth_clouds.jpg)
River winding through the orchards. (http://www.freethought-forum.com/forum/gallery/files/3/5/9/fruit_valley.jpg)

[ceptimus]

The gallery software here automatically downsizes your pics to about 600 pixels across (or down?) even if you upload them at much higher resolutions.

[Shake]

My wife loves taking pictures of people, while I prefer to photograph objects or scenes. I saw a good tree shot recently, though I can't remember where (here or elsewhere) and it reminded me of how I've been wanting to do a tree series for years. To me, they're a wonderful subject, whether they have their leaves or not. If I get around to it, I'll take some and post any that I feel are worth the time.

[Plant Woman]

Of course, being the sort of person I am, I always carry a notepad and a guide to the vascular flora of whatever region I'm currently exploring in my camera bag. I make sure that every picture is carefully labeled; I include the date and the place where the photo was taken, and I make absolutely certain that I've properly identified the flower, which is why I always carry the floral guide along.Of course, being the sort of person I am, I always carry a notepad and a guide to the vascular flora of whatever region I'm currently exploring in my camera bag. I make sure that every picture is carefully labeled; I include the date and the place where the photo was taken, and I make absolutely certain that I've properly identified the flower, which is why I always carry the floral guide along.

I am the same way. When in the field my backpack usually has two books and I note everything. Only now with the digital, I take a photo of my notes, because so many times I would take a lot of notes and then spend hours trying to match the notes to the images. Saves me a lot of time in the end.

The Flora in my region (maritime Pacific Northwest) are my favorite subjects to photograph. Have you seen the new book out called, Plants of Western Oregon, Washington & British Columbia by Eugene N. Kozloff? Altough its not the best to carry out in the field as it is heavy, it is one of the best keys to come along IMO since Hitchcock's Flora of the Pacific Northwest and of course updated.

[Johnny Pneumatic]

Here's (http://johnnypneumatic.deviantart.com/) my Deviant Art page. I've not got much on there yet(three's pathetic, compared to the hundreds of my works), but I'm going to try to get some more uploaded with my free time tomorrow.

[Petra]

I'm quite the amateur photographer myself.

Michael, please buy a digital camera - they're coming into their own, and some wonderful shots are taken with some great dSLR's. In fact, if you buy right, you may find that your old SLR lenses fit well with the new dSLR. :)


And when you do, you will post your pictures here, won't you? :cool:

[Petra]

(my gift to myself for quitting smoking).

Ok, enough wit'da guilts, sistah! :guilty:

And Photoshop. Don't forget about Photoshop.

Uh-uh. Photoshop is too much fun. :D

I started getting into photography to shoot reference material to paint from.Then moved to using photos as a jumping off point for digital paintings.

I'd love to do that; but alas, I lack talent.

You have some lovely work, though. You should share them here more. :wink: :D

[Petra]

I took my new camera for a walk today to try it out. All the snaps below were taken in the space of a twenty minute walk.

Wow! You live in a seriously beautiful and fascinating place, ceptimus! I can't believe the detail in the headstone pics. Amazing.

And those names! Solomon Shrimpton of Studly; and Ebenezer Edkins, father to the fatherless; and his Relict, Sarah.

I wish I'd spent more time in the country when I was in Britain.
/me swoons

[Petra]

BTW, that poppy is an opium poppy—Papaver somniferum.

Right! The opium poppy...I knew I'd forgotten something.

If you ever need instructions, cep, just let me know, a'ight. :wink: :D

[Petra]

Picture 01: Potentilla norvegica (Norwegian Cinquefoil)
Photographed at Kamiak Butte County Park, near Pullman, Washington
June 13, 2000

Picture 03: View from atop Kamiak Butte, looking East
Moscow Mountain, just across the border in Idaho, is visible on the horizon
July 16, 2000

Picture 05: Looking West from Freezout Saddle
St. Joe National Forest, Clearwater Range of the Rocky Mountains, near Clarkia, Idaho
July 30, 2000

Picture 06: Catelleja miniata (Scarlet Paintbrush)
Photographed at Freezout Saddle, St. Joe National Forest, near Clarkia, Idaho
July 30, 2000

Picture 07: Looking North from Freezout Saddle
St. Joe National Forest, Clearwater Range of the Rocky Mountains, near Clarkia, Idaho
July 30, 2000

Picture 08: Rana pretiosa (Spotted Frog)
Photographed on Moscow Mountain, near Moscow, Idaho
August 6, 2000

Picture 09: Geranium viscosissimum (Sticky Geranium)
Photographed at Wawawai County Park, near Colton, Washington
May 26, 2003

Picture 10: Castelleja hispida (Harsh Paintbrush)
Photographed atop Kamiak Butte, near Pullman, Washington
June 1, 2003

Picture 11: Moonrise, as seen near Pomeroy, Washington
November 26, 2004

Picture 12: Mount Rainier, as seen from White Pass
US Highway 12, near Yakima, Washington
December 23, 2004

Oh, Michael!

/me swoons again

I travelled the US from coast to coast and north to south, back in the 70's. I will never forget the beauty and majesty of the North American landscape. Breathtaking. :bow:

[Dingfod]

From what the photos of New Zealand I've seen, it isn't exactly shabby.

[Petra]

My Canon Powershot S3 just arrived. :yup:

I've updated my volume in the Members Gallery with several (downsized) examples of the photos; i.e., I didn't want to post 2.3 MB files, so they've all been shrunk to 1/3 size.

Snail (http://www.freethought-forum.com/forum/gallery/files/3/5/9/s3_snail.jpg)
Spiderweb (http://www.freethought-forum.com/forum/gallery/files/3/5/9/s3_spiderweb_427854.jpg)
Berry (http://www.freethought-forum.com/forum/gallery/files/3/5/9/s3_berry.jpg)
Yellow pansies. (http://www.freethought-forum.com/forum/gallery/files/3/5/9/s3_pansies.jpg)
Lake Wenatchee (http://www.freethought-forum.com/forum/gallery/files/3/5/9/lake_wenatchee.jpg)
Green pool on the river. (http://www.freethought-forum.com/forum/gallery/files/3/5/9/green_pool.jpg)
Clouds over Leavenworth (http://www.freethought-forum.com/forum/gallery/files/3/5/9/leavenworth_clouds.jpg)
River winding through the orchards. (http://www.freethought-forum.com/forum/gallery/files/3/5/9/fruit_valley.jpg)

Nice, Sauron! A few of those pics reminded me of the alpine region between Bavaria and Italy. Lake Tahoe, also.

I bet you're happy to be home, eh? :cool: And keep using that new camera - I'd love to see you and where you live. :yup:

[Petra]

From what the photos of New Zealand I've seen, it isn't exactly shabby.

:)

It is quite beautiful; more so in some places than in others. But we don't have that amazing history in our cemetaries and architecture. There is some, but it tends to go back only a hundred years or so, rather than through "ages".

I'll try to get out and take more pics of the Waikato and Bay of Plenty when the weather is kinder. The last couple of weeks have been cold, wet, dark and dismal. Weatherwise, anyway. :intherain:

[Petra]

My wife loves taking pictures of people, while I prefer to photograph objects or scenes. I saw a good tree shot recently, though I can't remember where (here or elsewhere) and it reminded me of how I've been wanting to do a tree series for years. To me, they're a wonderful subject, whether they have their leaves or not. If I get around to it, I'll take some and post any that I feel are worth the time.

Yes, please!

You're in Rochester, right? North of New York City?


As I said, "yes, please!" :D

[Petra]

Of course, being the sort of person I am, I always carry a notepad and a guide to the vascular flora of whatever region I'm currently exploring in my camera bag. I make sure that every picture is carefully labeled; I include the date and the place where the photo was taken, and I make absolutely certain that I've properly identified the flower, which is why I always carry the floral guide along.Of course, being the sort of person I am, I always carry a notepad and a guide to the vascular flora of whatever region I'm currently exploring in my camera bag. I make sure that every picture is carefully labeled; I include the date and the place where the photo was taken, and I make absolutely certain that I've properly identified the flower, which is why I always carry the floral guide along.

I am the same way. When in the field my backpack usually has two books and I note everything. Only now with the digital, I take a photo of my notes, because so many times I would take a lot of notes and then spend hours trying to match the notes to the images. Saves me a lot of time in the end.

The Flora in my region (maritime Pacific Northwest) are my favorite subjects to photograph. Have you seen the new book out called, Plants of Western Oregon, Washington & British Columbia by Eugene N. Kozloff? Altough its not the best to carry out in the field as it is heavy, it is one of the best keys to come along IMO since Hitchcock's Flora of the Pacific Northwest and of course updated.


You two should meet, then get married and have babies. I'm serious here. :violets: :sml: :nosegay:

[Petra]

Here's (http://johnnypneumatic.deviantart.com/) my Deviant Art page. I've not got much on there yet(three's pathetic, compared to the hundreds of my works), but I'm going to try to get some more uploaded with my free time tomorrow.

Ra's Chair is uber-cool, JP. :yup:

[Petra]

By the way, verte - where are you?

I know you bought a camera, so you can quit hiding now. :D

[Petra]

Here's a pic of Zoe I took at my mother's place a few days ago. She'd just been woken up to come for breakfast. Yes, she's having diet coke with her breakfast - something that would never happen at MY house.

When I return from Fiji, I'll start a proper gallery here. :-)

[Legs]

Hi pepperspray :wave:

Zoe has lovely skin, no freckles or blemishes... and look at those beautiful brown eyes. :vibes:

[Petra]

Thank you, Legs! I think she's rather lovely, myself. And I'm not biased or anything of course. :vibes:

[Miss Shelby]

Here's a pic of Zoe I took at my mother's place a few days ago. She'd just been woken up to come for breakfast. Yes, she's having diet coke with her breakfast - something that would never happen at MY house.

When I return from Fiji, I'll start a proper gallery here. :-)
she is bee-you-tee-ful. :)

Michelle

[The Lone Ranger]

The Flora in my region (maritime Pacific Northwest) are my favorite subjects to photograph. Have you seen the new book out called, Plants of Western Oregon, Washington & British Columbia by Eugene N. Kozloff? Altough its not the best to carry out in the field as it is heavy, it is one of the best keys to come along IMO since Hitchcock's Flora of the Pacific Northwest and of course updated.

Kozloff's book does indeed look good, though I haven't gotten a copy yet. I really like the Flora of the Pacific Northwest, and I have a copy "permanently" in my camera bag. It's definitely one of the best regional floral guides I've encountered.



Michael, please buy a digital camera - they're coming into their own, and some wonderful shots are taken with some great dSLR's. In fact, if you buy right, you may find that your old SLR lenses fit well with the new dSLR.
I was in the photo center today to get some prints developed, and while I waited, I leafed through some of their catalogs. I asked about the resolution of the latest digital SLRs available, and he told me that the best ones are good for prints up to about 20" by 30" before pixelation becomes noticable. Heck, it's not like I ever make prints that large anyway.

I certainly can't afford a good-quality digital SLR right now, but perhaps in a year or two ...




You two should meet, then get married and have babies. I'm serious here.
I think I've been complimented! I'm not entirely certain that Plant Woman would agree, however!




I took these photos of Mount St. Helens and Coldwater Lake last December (December 2004, that is). I thought it'd be fun to scan them and "stitch" them together digitally; it was originally four separate photographs. Not too bad for a first attempt, I suppose, but given where the sun was at the time, there was no way to make the lighting in the pictures match up. I'm sure someone who's really good with Photoshop could make the end-result look much nicer than I can.

(Mount St. Helens is at the right -- it's the one with its top blown off.)

Cheers,

Michael

[JoeP]

That's a great montage, Michael! (Given the loss of contrast in bottom left corner of the right-hand photo, due to it being brighter overall, I don't think the join could be made invisible.)

[Johnny Pneumatic]

Ra's Chair is uber-cool, JP. :yup:


Thanks.


Who's Zoe? Your little sister? She kinda looks like you, but you look way too young to be her mother.

[Johnny Pneumatic]

That's a great montage, Michael! (Given the loss of contrast in bottom left corner of the right-hand photo, due to it being brighter overall, I don't think the join could be made invisible.)

Sure it could. Even if it took cheating(cloning trees and water from other parts of the photo into those spots) it could be done. Photoshop, combined with other programs and skills if need be, lets you fake anything. Trust me, I know.

[JoeP]

Sure, if you're going to cheat. It could be made seamless by going back there and taking another pic with a landscape camera.

[Plant Woman]

Kozloff's book does indeed look good, though I haven't gotten a copy yet. I really like the Flora of the Pacific Northwest, and I have a copy "permanently" in my camera bag. It's definitely one of the best regional floral guides I've encountered.

If Flora lives in your bag on a permanent basis, you will definitely be glad you bought Kozloff's book.

You two should meet, then get married and have babies. I'm serious here.

I think I've been complimented! I'm not entirely certain that Plant Woman would agree, however!

I don't think so, since you are probably young enough to be a son. But your kind words brought a smile to my face.

[viscousmemories]

I keep trying to take pictures of these deer in my backyard, but all I have is a little Olympus Stylus 300 digital camera and (apparently) seriously bad shakes. I was taking pics of this buck and doe sitting about 5 ft. apart, 20 ft. from my patio, but they came out so badly focused you can hardly tell there's a deer in the picture. While I was clicking another doe leapt to her feet maybe 10 ft. in front of me (I hadn't even seen her) and I snapped this picture. I thought I was holding the camera pretty steady and it's supposed to auto-focus, but with all the trees I guess that doesn't work very well. I had turned off the flash, but don't know how to do more than that.

Anyway, here's that last pic:

[curses]

Nice! Do you have a railing or patio furniture you can steady yourself on, vm? That helps me when I don't have a tripod.

[viscousmemories]

There's a railing, but don't think I could've stepped to it without spooking them. As it is they all leapt to their feet when she did and started milling around nervously, and I was standing right outside my patio door not making any loud noise or sudden moves. There's four of them sitting in a circle out there right now, and they all stare at me when I'm walking around in my living room. :aww:

(Incidentally I know the picture is crap, I just think it's cool that I have deers in my backyard and I'm trying to figure out how to get clearer pictures with a cheapo camera in those dense, sparsely lit trees.)

[The Jesus Lawyer]

that's very cool that they get up that close :)

when you take pics, do you hold the button down only half way for a moment, before pressing it all the way? this allows the camera to grab focus.


michael :)

[viscousmemories]

I used to before I forgot I was supposed to do that. Thanks!

[Ari]

Can your camera sit on a tripod?
Can a remote be plug into it, or otherwise used?

[viscousmemories]

It can use a tripod, and I can apparently get one for about $10 (which I'll be doing soon).

Not sure about the remote.

[Ari]

Cool deer BTW.

A cheap tripod is a must.
I was curious so I looked it up, it does seem it can work with the "RM-2 remote control"* which appears to be IR. So you might be able to sit it outside or at least closer, and snap the button from farther away.

Edit to add the star I forgot:
*not sure the price of it alone, sometimes remotes can be expensive for no reason but to take your money.

[viscousmemories]

Oh cool, thanks for the tip.

[Ari]

...Although you may want to check and see if there is an IR port on the back (just thought of this) as sometimes they put one just on the front for those annoying family photos. If there is only one on the front I think mirrors reflect IR well enough but it would require a little home editing to add reflectors to the front.