Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Post Your Photos > Biweekly Shoot Out

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 29, 2010, 8:03 AM   #1
Member
 
johnnymisadventures's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 58
Default Give Us Your Favorites

Well here are my favs.

This first is the Canadian Parliament buildings before Christmas. It was taken with a 30 second exposure. I was pretty happy with it as I don't often shoot buildings



My other favorite would have to be a kayaking photo (what I take the most of) I took of my friend as she is about to drop of the edge of a waterfall. I stood in the water on the edge of the drop and shot it at 10mm holding the camera above her head. She almost knocked the camera out of my hand with her paddle. The only thing I wish turned out a little better is being able to see the height of the drop a little better. I tried everything I knew in post processing but could not achieve it. Any help of how to do it or examples would be greatly appreciated



John
johnnymisadventures is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Dec 29, 2010, 8:17 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,093
Default

I think the problem you had with getting the depth of the drop to show up was at least partly due to using such a wide angle lens -- everything is in focus with UWA lenses, and what you would want to suggest the drop is for your friend to be in focus and the water below her to be somewhat more blurry. I'm not sure that that would have done it, but that is what I would have tried. Given the angle of the shot, there isn't going to be any other visual cue to the drop.
tclune is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 29, 2010, 10:36 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
VTphotog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Extreme Northeastern Vermont, USA
Posts: 4,212
Default

Since the camera has only one 'eye', it isn't going to be able to show depth the way we see it, with two. In order to show distances in a two dimensional picture, we need to have something to compare, such as another kayak at the bottom of the falls, or to take the shot from downstream, so there is a comparison between the person and the height of the falls. As tclune mentions, the WA lens also tends to foreshorten perspective.

brian
VTphotog is online now   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 31, 2010, 9:09 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
mtngal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Posts: 16,044
Default

All I can say is that I like both pictures. While there isn't the oof to give you a feeling of height, if you look at the water ripples both above and below the falls, you get the idea.
mtngal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 31, 2010, 11:09 PM   #5
Moderator
 
calr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Beaverton, OR
Posts: 8,466
Default

The first shot doesn't look real to me. It looks like a diorama you might setup on the fireplace mantel.

I agree with the other comments about the second shot.

Cal
calr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 1, 2011, 7:27 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,885
Default

The festive building looks very odd against the night sky which seems very ominous. Makes for a very interesting image.
vsch1 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 7:12 AM.