All Forum Comments
Comment by Anvh posted on Help with stacking at 29/11/2009 - 14:27
Just added that to my Last comment Peter
That's where it comes from indeed but I lost how they did it
That's where it comes from indeed but I lost how they did it
Comment by Anvh posted on Help with stacking at 29/11/2009 - 14:11
HDR means High Dynamic Range and I'm not trying to expend the dynamic range of the photos I'm trying to stack the "light output value" of several photos together without discrimination of what's light or dark to synthesize a longer exposure.
Have been searching and found this link Will try the program but would like to do everything in photoshop to be honest.
Some Astro-photographers can surely help me
Have been searching and found this link Will try the program but would like to do everything in photoshop to be honest.
Some Astro-photographers can surely help me
Comment by Anvh posted on Help with stacking at 29/11/2009 - 14:08
Wanted to put the technique to the test but I lost the article about it
There are three kind of stacking so far as I know.
- Focus
- averaging
- exposure
Focus is not the one I want.
Averaging is easy and not a problem.
Exposure is the one I'm lost with at the moment, the idea is that you capture a small amount of light with every frame and then merge them together to get the right exposure.
So lets say you need a 30 second exposure, instead of that you should be able to make 6 photos of 5 seconds and stack those to 30 second.
I had a site about it but lost it, can someone please help me.
There are three kind of stacking so far as I know.
- Focus
- averaging
- exposure
Focus is not the one I want.
Averaging is easy and not a problem.
Exposure is the one I'm lost with at the moment, the idea is that you capture a small amount of light with every frame and then merge them together to get the right exposure.
So lets say you need a 30 second exposure, instead of that you should be able to make 6 photos of 5 seconds and stack those to 30 second.
I had a site about it but lost it, can someone please help me.
Comment by Anvh posted on Help with stacking at 29/11/2009 - 13:52
From the same site I always use, something about most if not all the photographic filters.
http://www.galitz.co.il/en/articles/filters.shtml
http://www.galitz.co.il/en/articles/filters.shtml
Comment by Anvh posted on Landscape Filters at 29/11/2009 - 13:23
Mannesty wrote:
Probably the chance that it comes is less then that it not comes.mowog wrote:
I firmly believe that Pentax will give us a full frame SLR soon.
But then again, I also believe that Spurs will win the Premier league title, Jason Stathham will get an Oscar for best actor and Labour will win the next election.
I think all of your beliefs have about an equal chance of being fulfilled. None to no chance at all springs to mind.I firmly believe that Pentax will give us a full frame SLR soon.
But then again, I also believe that Spurs will win the Premier league title, Jason Stathham will get an Oscar for best actor and Labour will win the next election.
The Canon 7D just showed us how good an APS-C sensor can be these days so we will probably find something close to that with the next model.
When someone posted a link with some high iso photos some thought it was a full frame camera so that says it all that we don't need it
Comment by Anvh posted on did I hear about Pentax bringing out a full-frame SLR? at 29/11/2009 - 13:18
Clarky wrote:
It sure is an ugly looking thing Why is the body so big on it : is that to accomodate the huge sensor : What size is the sensor by the way. :
linkIt sure is an ugly looking thing Why is the body so big on it : is that to accomodate the huge sensor : What size is the sensor by the way. :
Anvh wrote:
39.5 MP is pretty unlikely you know because I'm 90% sure they will use a Kodak sensor (wanna bet?) and they don't have such sensor.
The news went 2 years ago that they would use the KAF-31600 31.6 MP sensor from them but probably that is now updated to the newer KAF-40000 40.0 MP.
Kodak sensors are however cropped sensors.
45.76mm x 35.34mm (digital)/ 56mm x 41.5mm (film) still a good size larger then 35mm sensors.
Here is more information on the likely candidate link
39.5 MP is pretty unlikely you know because I'm 90% sure they will use a Kodak sensor (wanna bet?) and they don't have such sensor.
The news went 2 years ago that they would use the KAF-31600 31.6 MP sensor from them but probably that is now updated to the newer KAF-40000 40.0 MP.
Kodak sensors are however cropped sensors.
45.76mm x 35.34mm (digital)/ 56mm x 41.5mm (film) still a good size larger then 35mm sensors.
Here is more information on the likely candidate link
Comment by Anvh posted on did I hear about Pentax bringing out a full-frame SLR? at 29/11/2009 - 13:13
You mean the AF article.
I'm probably one of the few of the new generation that use MF primarily, it slows me down and lets me think about the composition.
Well to be honest I do use AF since I'm lazy but I always give the focus ring a twist to place it where I want it.
This what they wrote and I believe it's true though.
I'm probably one of the few of the new generation that use MF primarily, it slows me down and lets me think about the composition.
Well to be honest I do use AF since I'm lazy but I always give the focus ring a twist to place it where I want it.
This what they wrote and I believe it's true though.
Quote:
So is there any place left for manual focusing?
For any subject that is either not actively moving away from the photographer's position or that is set to move into the “trap focus” after careful pre-focusing, better results can be achieved with careful manual focusing. Carefully framed landscape shots, images of buildings or architectural details and meticulously arranged tabletop displays in a photographer's studio are unlikely to require the use of autofocus.
So is there any place left for manual focusing?
For any subject that is either not actively moving away from the photographer's position or that is set to move into the “trap focus” after careful pre-focusing, better results can be achieved with careful manual focusing. Carefully framed landscape shots, images of buildings or architectural details and meticulously arranged tabletop displays in a photographer's studio are unlikely to require the use of autofocus.
Comment by Anvh posted on Distortion at 29/11/2009 - 13:08
Quite a good article about lens distortion, a bit technical though link
I wonder if they would have more articles
edit: the answer is yes.
There is one mostly in every newsletter
This the current one and you can go into archive for the older ones link
An interesting one about focusing link
I wonder if they would have more articles
edit: the answer is yes.
There is one mostly in every newsletter
This the current one and you can go into archive for the older ones link
An interesting one about focusing link
Comment by Anvh posted on Distortion at 29/11/2009 - 00:09
To help sales...
Since it's from SRS the warranty will be honoured and transferred to the new owner if he/she is a member of the forum.
Carl, consider making a photo of the front and rear glass of the lens to simply show that it isn't damage in any way.
Seeing is easier then believing is what they say.
Since it's from SRS the warranty will be honoured and transferred to the new owner if he/she is a member of the forum.
Carl, consider making a photo of the front and rear glass of the lens to simply show that it isn't damage in any way.
Seeing is easier then believing is what they say.
Comment by Anvh posted on Brand New Pentax FA 50 mm f/ 1.4 for sale at 28/11/2009 - 23:56
What's the difference between 20 x 1 image and 1 x 20 images?