All Forum Comments
Comment by johnriley posted on Going Digital at 09/08/2006 - 12:51
No, not that bad at all, but if I may offer some constructive criticism I think the colours of the butterly need to be a little bolder, and the picture could do with being crisper.
The background is fantastic and has been beautifully rendered.
Hope you don't mind the comments, Liam.
The background is fantastic and has been beautifully rendered.
Hope you don't mind the comments, Liam.
Comment by johnriley posted on Flutterbies.. at 08/08/2006 - 23:54
The "best" film is the one that suits the effect that you want to achieve.
If you want fine grain, sharpness and high resolution then a slow film. If you want grain, higher shutter speeds and can sacrifice some resolution then a fast film. But fast films can still be sharp.
My personal choice would currently be Fuji Velvia for slides and Kodak Tri-X for monochrome. I never use colour negative films. As you can see, the objectives I have in slides and b/w prints are totally different.
If you want fine grain, sharpness and high resolution then a slow film. If you want grain, higher shutter speeds and can sacrifice some resolution then a fast film. But fast films can still be sharp.
My personal choice would currently be Fuji Velvia for slides and Kodak Tri-X for monochrome. I never use colour negative films. As you can see, the objectives I have in slides and b/w prints are totally different.
Comment by johnriley posted on Which Film Brand at 03/08/2006 - 15:40
For prints or slides? Colour or monochrome?
Comment by johnriley posted on Which Film Brand at 02/08/2006 - 22:57
I have heard that it's also a lot better than some of the kit lenses offered by other manufacturers.
Having said that, the 16-45mm is better, but then so is the price!
Having said that, the 16-45mm is better, but then so is the price!
Comment by johnriley posted on 18-55 Kit lens at 06/08/2006 - 22:17
At that sort of price you might as well have the 18-55mm. It is a little soft wide open, but sharp enough closed down a couple of stops. It also focuses reasonably closely. All in all a very respectable and useful lens.
Comment by johnriley posted on 18-55 Kit lens at 02/08/2006 - 22:59
The haze filter would reduce the blue light that gets scattered and spoils definition and contrast. So, thet's absolutely right, in some cases filters can improve a shot, especially long distance ones like you describe.
However, it would have been counter-productive if you had wanted a misty, atmospheric scene, so it depends on what you are trying to achieve.
However, it would have been counter-productive if you had wanted a misty, atmospheric scene, so it depends on what you are trying to achieve.
Comment by johnriley posted on 2xConverter at 24/10/2006 - 08:02
Quote:
(ie it might be handling before VAT!)
You can bet that the import duty and handling fee will all be subject to VAT.... (ie it might be handling before VAT!)
Comment by johnriley posted on K100D Expected UK Release? at 08/08/2006 - 16:54
It is indeed a blending mode, but which one I can't remember - I just tried them until I got the effect I wanted. Other adjustments were the relative opacities of the two layers and the individual adjustments to levels.
Less transparency or different contrast levels are possible indeed - it's a judgement call - the potential for variation is endless. This was the point I chose that gave me what I was looking for in the image.
Thanks for the thoughts!
Less transparency or different contrast levels are possible indeed - it's a judgement call - the potential for variation is endless. This was the point I chose that gave me what I was looking for in the image.
Thanks for the thoughts!
Comment by johnriley posted on A new picture at 31/07/2006 - 16:28
The DSLR will be better in every respect apart from size.