wonderful thanks for posting
Reading many posts here I think this forum should be really renamed in canonbashers.com
Forget about those bulky mirrorless things, that's only intermediate technology 2.0 (with loud bangin' mechanical shutters, how primitive) after DSLRs. My personal prospect for the future of digital photography and videography is eye-implant surgery. Since more and more male hipster google glass wearers are beaten up by women, as happened recently in Frisco, the technology has to be hidden right in the eyes. I can imagine a mesh like retina implant that uses the space between the photoreceptor cells. Micromike implants in the ears. Wireless readout of data for sharing, this technology will of course include an in-eye 3D-projection of pictures and videos on demand. Telephoto simply by using binoculars.
So, how about a new Eyeos implant camera line, Canon? C'mon dumb Google...
There are always good reasons to shoot in various modes.
P-mode is fantastic when run-and-gunning a live event where light is constantly shifting as well as the subjects. Where shutter speed or aperture effects aren't important to the shot.
A-priority is great for various reasons especially when trying to control depth-of-field. Or when trying to keep the ISO below a certain point.
T-priority is wonderful when you need a specific shutter speed for either greater sharpness or blurriness of action.
Manual also has it's place. I use this frequently as well.... I shoot on the 5D3 and will set my aperture for the depth-of-field I prefer, set my time to a minimum of 60 (for motion shots) and Auto-ISO to let the camera adjust for the lighting. This way I have control over the look. The 5D3 is great in low-light situations, so the manual feature with auto-ISO comes in very hand at this point.
This morning it was raining a ton but I was using a plastic bag to cover my 6D as I shot a quidditch tourney. As time went on, my playback button stopped working...
I suspect evil magic is afoot, and the smart money is that Team Slitherin had something to do with it.
I'm fairly certain that the first picture is not a B-24 Liberator but an Avro Lancaster. The cockpit glass is not correct for the B-24, the B-24 did not have a Gun turrent on the top in the main body, and the 4 engines in the picture are Rolls Royce Merlins which were on the Lancaster. If you Google B-24 Liberator pictures and Avro Lancaster pictures you can see the difference.
In any event great looking pictures.
All I did was flip it upside down...here's the original! and the upside down shot is the second one.
The pond was so calm and perfect that day that the reflected image was just as sharp as the original.
in the original, you can see some ripples in the water in the upper right part of the image....and you can see those same ripples in the lower left after the flip.
Anybody care to venture a guess as to what happened to the birds in flight in this image?
It's his second alias in three months. He was mikea in December. Edward (eml58) gave him a good beating and off he went. Reappeard as Nalle Puh (Swedish for Winnie the Pooh) and apparently he's gone again. Can't say I'll miss him. But on the other hand, he does stur up some good discussions
Additionally, I have discovered that using my 100mm macro to photograph my negatives gives really phenomenal results over straight scanning. You actually retain the grain structure in the negative rather than the weird pixel/grain hybrid look you get from scanning
That's very interesting, I'd love to know more about your setup for that please.
I considered getting an old FD slide duplicator (I already have an FD/eos adapter) but a quick Google put me off the idea at the time.
It was actually a forehead slapping moment for me.
It started with me acquiring a 1904 stereo viewer and the idea that I would like to produce my own stereocards. Picked up the kodak stereo camera soon after and shot the test roll. Then came the frustrations of trying to get decent scans out of my epson 3200 with the odd format of the stereo negatives. Back when I got the thing I felt that I got some decent results scanning 120 frames but with the slight curl of 35mm format coupled with the paired images being separated by three frames it was a complete nightmare getting anything remotely acceptable.
After a couple hours scouring the internet for different solutions, I ran across some guys blog expressing the same frustrations about direct scanning that I had and that his solution was to photograph his negatives with his macro lens. This was the forehead slap moment. Brilliance is often so simple...
Anyway, I use a simple light box (same one I used in art school for tracing stuff and viewing print files of negatives). I place the negative emulsion up and place a cleaned piece of glass over it. The guy from the blog suggested taking 4 sections of the negative and merging them in PS to maximize detail and resolution but as I was already shooting a smaller format and just doing a quick handheld shot I just did a single frame at the largest RAW setting.
Works brilliantly! I did have to do a perspective crop in PS as it was hand held my edges weren't perfectly straight and you do have to invert the image to get a positive but the results were CLEAN. Totally beats even the results I used to get scanning 4x5s on a Flex scanner.
Additionally, I used to have to do dupes when I worked at the lab and I always was surprised how much was lost in that process. I would say this process beats those results by a long shot as well.
If you have the 100mm L you should give it a try. I doubt you'd be disappointed. I'm sure the non L would yield superior results as well.