March 01, 2015, 06:45:28 PM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - arioch82

Pages: [1] 2 3 4
Photography Technique / Re: sunset post-processing
« on: July 10, 2014, 03:33:25 AM »
thanks all for the tips, what about something like this? too dark/contrasty?

dpclicks what do you mean when you say that i am losing details?

full resolution here:

Photography Technique / sunset post-processing
« on: July 09, 2014, 08:10:04 PM »
Hi guys,

I was wondering if you had any generic tips / techniques that you always use and look for when post processing sunsets.

I am only a photo enthusiast (I have never sold my pictures), I don't like the extreme HDR look too much, i try to play as little as i can with levels trying to keep a "realistic" image but i feel like i am missing something when editing photos that can push it "to the next level" and i am not sure of what it is...

for instance, what would you do with this picture?

I shot it at the grand canyon a couple of weeks ago (i think using the samyang 14mm, this is a smaller 1000x1000 preview)

I personally feel that the shooting angle is not one of the best, having the bright sun in the middle of the picture your eyes are automatically drawn to it when you first see it, if i could shoot it again i would probably rotate the camera to the right to remove those trees on the left and get more of the canyon.

but since this is what i have... how would you edit it?

Thank you!

Canon General / Re: Gear for 9 days trip to Utah National Parks
« on: June 05, 2014, 08:12:59 PM »
i am curious because i am doing a very similar trip next week in the same area...
are you camping?
with backpack/tent etc. how are you planning on doing even just some hiking with all that equipment?

you make me feel really out of shape   :o

Didn't read all the comments in detail, but you will also need a good, sturdy tripod and a remote shutter release if you're going to go longer than 30s exposure.

Sturdy tripod is self-explanitory. You don't have to spend $1500 (unless you want to), and you can always rent.

Remote shutter release is needed because I believe the maximum time for Canon is 30s exposures. If you want longer, you need to use Bulb mode, which means you need to hold down the shutter button. Not ideal, however most/all wired remote shutter will have a 'lock' which lets you keep it open without needing to hold the button down. Or if you get one of the fancier ones it'll allow for an appropriate time without you need to release the button after counting using your watch.

Last, use Mirror Lockup, and ideally the long exposure subtraction which will take a 2nd shot of the same length but without opening the shutter in order to subtract generated noise from the exposed image. Of course, it'll be 2x the length of time.

Hi Drizzt321,

I have a manfrotto 055CXPro3 with an Acratech ultimate ballhead, never tried exposures that long but i think i should be fine?

That link about the long exposure noise reduction seems like a great read, thanks!

Thanks guys for all your beautiful advices :)

dswtan that unprocessed raw of the milky way is really what i was looking for, thanks and congratulation for that beautiful shot!

nitelife2 that textmarker advice is great, i haven't really thought of that, thanks!

I have double checked and the next new moon is going to be exactly that weekend i'm going to the desert, what a lucky coincidence, can't wait for it!

thanks first of all :)

and yeah i meant chrominance noise (no idea of why i wrote luminance).
i'm going to use my 5D MkII so up to 1600 i shouldn't have any problems, going over with the long exposures i'm a bit worried about the color noise... but i've seen incredible milky way shots made at 3200 with the 5D so it should be fine, i will do some experimentation for sure!
is it easy with stars to see what's a star and what is chroma noise?
I was  thinking that maybe correcting for color noise is going to remove stars and not correcting enough is going to leave "too many stars"...
That's the main reason actually of why i was asking for unedited raws... do people normally "fake stars" leaving some chrominance noise to get a fuller sky?

Hi guys,

on the first weekend of october i'm going camping in joshua tree desert in southern california, for the occasion (and my upcoming birthday) i've bought the samyang 14mm f/2.8 and i would love to try to do some stars photography and possibly getting a glance at the milky way.

Having always lived in highly polluted areas I've never tried any kind of "astrophotography" before and i see all these beautiful images around... that maybe are too beautiful to be true without a lot help in post? :)

I was wondering what kind of results you can get as a single shot (raw) straight out of the camera without any post-processing (even just stars, stills no trails), so when i see my images on the camera after the shot i can actually understand if i'm going the right way or not (I am a fan of the good old trial and error...); how many stars are actually visible? how many are just luminance noise for the high iso/long exposure?

Thank you all!

Landscape / Re: Beautiful sunsets
« on: September 04, 2013, 12:45:43 AM »
I took this a while ago, as I do photography only as an hobby I would love some brutal critiques! :)

Landscape / Re: Sunset landscape
« on: June 25, 2013, 01:31:01 AM »
shot at King's Canyon National Forest, the camera started giving me error 20 on the first day and this is one of the few pictures i've been able to take T_T

Sports / Re: Cars cars cars (and some bikes)
« on: May 11, 2013, 10:18:58 PM »
my humble amateur contribution to this topic, long beach drifting race :)
tamron 70-300 from the bleachers for the first two, canon 100L macro for the last two

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Interesting contest from Tamron
« on: May 02, 2013, 04:40:17 PM »
If I photograph a group of friends smiling and holding up their index and middle fingers, while sitting behind the cracked windshield of a blue, 1950's T-Bird that they've just washed, does that count for 9 or 10 of the photographs?!?   ::)
I'll give you 9.  I don't think it would count for the cooking utinsel.

the hood could be open with someone cooking an egg on the engine

HDR - High Dynamic Range / Re: Post your HDR images:
« on: November 21, 2012, 03:00:36 PM »
playing with the tone mapping in lightroom....

Macro / Re: Playing with water drops
« on: November 12, 2012, 02:21:26 PM »
Can you explain better how are you doing the different color drops? do you use different liquids?
They look great , thanks for sharing :)

EOS Bodies / Re: DxOMark Sensor Performance: Nikon vs. Canon
« on: September 25, 2012, 05:37:48 PM »
Meh, Use your filters. I've seen plenty of good landscapes taken with crap cameras. I could use a D30 and get a good landscape.

what does an answer like this even means?
let's all go back to film then, i've seen plenty of good landscapes taken with film cameras.

He posted a comparison between the two sensor and the Nikon/Sony one is unarguably better.
Does this means that you cannot take beautiful pictures with a 5D Mk3? NO
Does this means that for a lower price Nikon is offering a camera with a better sensor that let you take beautiful pictures easily? YES

why can't people just admit that? customers should push their brand to do better, not settle down saying "nah i don't care if the competition is offering a better product for less money, I'm happy with what I have, please next time charge me more and remove some features, I will be willing to pay for it anyway".

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: A positive feedback for 6D
« on: September 25, 2012, 03:06:49 PM »
has any of you actually read that "test/review/comment"? is ridicolous, it doesn't mean anything

6. The result was blowing away my mind. The confirmation with 50mm 1.4 came immediatelly! The focus set perfect and I first could see what I shot on the screen! I did this maybe 10-15 times, turned the camera to the side and did a portrait of a backlit visitor sitting half in the darkness. Focus was perfect. The 5D II in compare was surching, surching, surching. It did not confirm. I repeated the test with the man and it was surching and surching and at least confirmed, too. I shot the pic but I can not say if it found the correct focus, because it was a 1/15th shot wide open and I could not hold it (sorry, I forgott to check the ISO setting). The pic done with the 6D was rasorsharp at ISO 25k.

i cannot believe how many fanboys here are finding excuses for an AF system like that that is what, 10 years old? when nikon on the other side is offering PRO-AF on even their lower-end cameras.
As long as people using canon products won't complain canon will keep using this kind of, sorry for the french, sh*t policy with their new products, not giving a damn of what the offer is like on the other side of the market.
I've always shot canon and probably always will since i like more their lenses but this doesn't mean that canon shouldn't try to offer a camera of the same level of a D600 if it's going to price it the same for instance; canon sensors are already a joke compared to the latest sony ones, they should've at least make some effort on some other aspects (and please don't mention wifi/gps)

My 2c

Pages: [1] 2 3 4