andrewk

Joined: 21st September 2008

All Forum Comments

Topics Created Topics Contributed Forum Comments Photo Comments

All Forum Comments

andrewk
You should be. It's a great lens.

Andrew

Comment by andrewk posted on FS: Pentax SMC 75-150 'M' at 21/03/2013 - 22:24

andrewk
Frogherder wrote:
Whats with all the red links scattered through most threads.
I had exactly the same problem, also on Firefox a few weeks back. I wish I could remember *exactly* what caused it. It was something that had downloaded along with some freeware that I wanted to test - a so-called download manager or something like that. The only freeware that I can remember downloading recently was CombineZP as I wanted to have a play with focus stacking (might have been something else, though).

Sorry I cannot be more helpful. If I remember what download caused the problem, I'll let you know.

Andrew

Comment by andrewk posted on Another pointless thread at 21/03/2013 - 09:25

andrewk
gwing wrote:
It's the glowing tree stump roots in the foreground that don't.
Aren't they just in sunshine rather than shade?

It's the perfect reflection that (to coin a phrase) "does my head in". You can make the whole thing look much more natural by selecting the water, darkening it and adding a bit of motion blur - but that would probably undo what redbusa99 was trying to achieve in the first place.

Andrew

Comment by andrewk posted on HDR at 20/03/2013 - 19:28

andrewk
A-mode is an auto mode where the flash meters and controls the exposure. Both the AF360FGZ and AF540FGZ have it in addition to P-TTL.

Andrew

Comment by andrewk posted on Cheap reliable and fast FLASH at 20/03/2013 - 07:13

andrewk
damperman wrote:
I've been reading an article on soft proofing before printing, this way you can correct the image before the print stage.
Question is, i use Elements 10, can soft proofing be done in Elements.
I use PSE8 and don't believe that you can do soft proofing in any version.

Andrew

Comment by andrewk posted on Soft Proofing at 18/03/2013 - 17:23

andrewk
wvbarnes wrote:
I wouldn't know where to start on how to apply a hard grad ND to a sky in software. Does it take the same length of time and can some one share the how pleaae?
There are lots of ways to do this in photoshop, using a gradient fill layer or just a new layer and the gradient tool - you can find loads on the internet and I'm sure others will detail the way they find most effective.

Have a play with this simple method as an alternative:

1) Click on the select tool. Change "feather" to 100 or 150 px. You can vary this depending on how hard you want the transition to be.

2) Make a selection of the sky, with the bottom edge finishing on the land you want unaffected. Use CTRL-J to create a new layer using just the selection.

3) Make sure the new layer is active - and use any way you like (e.g. levels) to adjust the sky brightness.

I (sometimes) use a variant on this in PSE8, 'coz you cannot create a new 16 bit layer using CTRL-J (though you can in 8-bit). Instead, in PSE, click on the MOVE tool. Hold down ALT and use the mouse to drag the 16-bit image in any direction, just a little. After doing that, move the image back again and let go of the mouse button. Magically a new layer appears. Check whether it is in the correct place by changing the blend mode temporarily to "Difference" - the screen should go black if OK. Change the blend mode back to normal. You can then make the sky selection, invert the selection and hit the delete key. You are then in the same place you would be after Step 2 had you been using Photshop.

Have fun
Andrew

Comment by andrewk posted on Filters at 18/03/2013 - 11:07

andrewk
Offertonhatter wrote:
I don't think it will match the IQ of the 50-135mm, but I will find out how close it is.
Did you move this forward? Are the results as expected - or too embarrassing to talk about?

Andrew

Comment by andrewk posted on Additions to my Lens collection (call it LBA-ish) at 13/03/2013 - 16:19

andrewk
johnriley wrote:
Ansel Adams called his negatives the score and his prints the performance and he worked on them very extensively to ensure that performance was superb.
I suspect that I can guess the answer to this, but did Ansel Adams use darkroom skills to create prints from bits of more than one negative?

Andrew

Comment by andrewk posted on Is photoshop ruining photography at 13/03/2013 - 09:50

andrewk
Smeggypants wrote:
Digital hasn't given anyone a better 'eye' though.
It's not an arguement about Photoshop per se, but digital has allowed the largely talent-free to take huge volumes of photos at little or no cost, compared with film. I've taken more photos since I bought a K200D than I have in the whole of my life previously.

Along with many others, I am hoping that a photographic version of the infinite monkey theorem will let me fluke a classic any time now.

Andrew

Comment by andrewk posted on Is photoshop ruining photography at 13/03/2013 - 09:18

andrewk
Snootchies wrote:
I can't argue with that. I have no qualms in doing processing, but I'm always honest about it
Yes, but there is "doing processing" and then there's "doing processing". What do you make of the image "Memories" on this web page?

The author describes it as an "image" made from 4 separate exposures. It was produced from photographs taken by the author, but arguably is not a photograph itself.

Thoughts?

Andrew

Comment by andrewk posted on Is photoshop ruining photography at 12/03/2013 - 14:59

Proudly supporting Pentax User

Samsung Logo Asahi Pentax Logo