All Forum Comments
Comment by Clarky posted on Some more bug macros at 17/02/2008 - 22:54
Quote:
A sucker, I reckon. Bit like the shield bugs we get here, this fellow looks as though he's about to pierce the stem of the plant with his mouth-parts, and suck out the sap.
Love the composition of this one, exposure's good, but focusing is slightly behind where I think it should be - on the eye. His legs and antenna on the far side are sharp. I do this all the time.
Come on Clarky, be hyper-critical with your focusing and these would be crackers!
Dan
I seem to get a lot of that (Focusing issues) I wonder if my camera is backfocusing a touch : But in my defence it was a bit windy and i was using the monopod Clarky wrote:
Not sure what you would call this guy
Not sure what you would call this guy
A sucker, I reckon. Bit like the shield bugs we get here, this fellow looks as though he's about to pierce the stem of the plant with his mouth-parts, and suck out the sap.
Love the composition of this one, exposure's good, but focusing is slightly behind where I think it should be - on the eye. His legs and antenna on the far side are sharp. I do this all the time.
Quote:
A leaf curler spider
A tricky one to compose I reckon - quite busy, but you've done a nice job. Really like the left-most leg on the web.A leaf curler spider
Quote:
A female Aerial weaver spider
Looks a little bit overexposed on the body, and definitely missed focus (don't think it's over compression for the 'web'). A female Aerial weaver spider
Quote:
A gathering of Leptocoris nymphs (Thanks Dan )
...and Mum and Dad too I reckon. But again, this doesn't look sharp. Would have been great to have got right in for a frame filling mass of bugs too.A gathering of Leptocoris nymphs (Thanks Dan )
Come on Clarky, be hyper-critical with your focusing and these would be crackers!
Dan
Thanks all
Comment by Clarky posted on Some more bug macros at 17/02/2008 - 20:29
I started out taking the Bigma out for a run and ended up not getting it out of the bag. I left the Tamron macro on instead, but that shouldn't surprise anyone i guess
So here are a few more bugs for your perusal. comments welcome as usual
Not sure what you would call this guy
A leaf curler spider
A female Aerial weaver spider
A gathering of Leptocoris nymphs (Thanks Dan )
So here are a few more bugs for your perusal. comments welcome as usual
Not sure what you would call this guy
A leaf curler spider
A female Aerial weaver spider
A gathering of Leptocoris nymphs (Thanks Dan )
Comment by Clarky posted on Some more bug macros at 17/02/2008 - 09:33
Quote:
A curious analogy. As far as I know the only thing you can do with the ingredients mentioned is bake a cake. The only things you can do with a cake are store them until hard and disgusting (my grandmother useed to do this witrh Date and Walnut cake. I detest Date and Walnut cake) or eat them.
Not quite sure how this relates to photography!
Well if you have a photograph of your grandmother forcing you too eat it and the expression on your face. Then i would be interested A curious analogy. As far as I know the only thing you can do with the ingredients mentioned is bake a cake. The only things you can do with a cake are store them until hard and disgusting (my grandmother useed to do this witrh Date and Walnut cake. I detest Date and Walnut cake) or eat them.
Not quite sure how this relates to photography!
Comment by Clarky posted on RAW+JPEG WHERE??? HOW??? at 04/03/2008 - 09:13
Quote:
A RAW file is not an uncompressed JPEG. Pentax RAW's are 12 bit, and JPEGs are 8.
G
I stand corrected A RAW file is not an uncompressed JPEG. Pentax RAW's are 12 bit, and JPEGs are 8.
G
Comment by Clarky posted on RAW+JPEG WHERE??? HOW??? at 04/03/2008 - 08:15
Quote:
This is why that photojournalist used them as his "Proof" of the shot.
So what i understand you are saying is, If you edit the raw file you can then not save it as a raw file but as a jpeg or tiff :Clarky wrote:
Of course you can modify a raw file, more so than a jpeg.
Nope, you're misunderstanding me. You cannot modify a Raw file. You can edit the image data a raw file holds and then save it out as a different file and as a different file format - but no matter what you do, you cannot change the original Raw file.Of course you can modify a raw file, more so than a jpeg.
This is why that photojournalist used them as his "Proof" of the shot.
Comment by Clarky posted on RAW+JPEG WHERE??? HOW??? at 04/03/2008 - 04:19
Quote:
Actually, there's a good reason to shoot Raw+JPG. I was talking to this semi-famous photojournalist at my photo club's last meeting (/bragging) and he said he always shot raw+jpg because he trusted his camera enough for the quality of the JPG in case he needed to quickly send them back to Canada without the post-production hassle. BUT here's the key - he'd have the Raw files to prove that his shots weren't tampered with and that they were the 100% accurate/original visual recordings. (You can't modify a Raw file!) So he was legally covered for when his shots were used in magazines.
Fascinating stuff, eh?
Of course you can modify a raw file, more so than a jpeg. If you do a lot of post production work with your pics, then you shoot raw as this will allow you to achieve finer detail. Actually, there's a good reason to shoot Raw+JPG. I was talking to this semi-famous photojournalist at my photo club's last meeting (/bragging) and he said he always shot raw+jpg because he trusted his camera enough for the quality of the JPG in case he needed to quickly send them back to Canada without the post-production hassle. BUT here's the key - he'd have the Raw files to prove that his shots weren't tampered with and that they were the 100% accurate/original visual recordings. (You can't modify a Raw file!) So he was legally covered for when his shots were used in magazines.
Fascinating stuff, eh?
If you are happy with your pics straight out of the camera and don't do a lot of post production then shoot jpeg
A raw file is basically an uncompressed jpeg and of course that means a smaller file for a jpeg compared to the raw file. cheers
Comment by Clarky posted on RAW+JPEG WHERE??? HOW??? at 04/03/2008 - 04:08
I agree with Hyram, very impressive indeed. I like #2 the best but i am a sucker for a good sunset.
That sigma sure gives excellent results for a budget lens
That sigma sure gives excellent results for a budget lens
Comment by Clarky posted on Conference centre [5 imgs] at 15/02/2008 - 01:07
Interesting experiment thanks for that
Comment by Clarky posted on K10 odd movement at 15/02/2008 - 13:10
I wonder if my camera is backfocusing a touch