My first DSLR shot

K

koffiejunkie

Executive Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2004
Messages
9,756
Reaction score
998
Location
Australia
Well, the first half decent one, anyways. ;)

linky

I did several things wrong. Biggest of which was white balance (only figured it out after I got home). Smaller aperture would have helped too - half of the bridge is out of focus :eek:

Lens is the kit lens at 21mm - not great for architecture...


Any criticism welcome.
 
Really nice.

Handheld at 1/6s? If so, really impressive. I agree that a smaller aperture would have improved the DOF, but it would have meant a longer exposure/higher ISO setting and corresponding higher noise or camera shake.

Did you do any post editing? The sky colour is great.
 
Nice - cant fault much about it. I ran it through a USM though and it made a nice difference (I think most photos will benefit from it).

BTW - check the difference between the full sized photo in Firefox as compared to Safari. (I'd use photoshops "save for web" next time if you want to avoid it. :D)
 
Last edited:
Nice picture, you have to look at it using 1024x768 resolution otherwise it looks funny, but that's probably just me.

bwana said:
Nice - cant fault much about it. I ran it through a USM though and it made a nice difference (I think most photos will benefit from it).
Click to expand...

What's USM?
 
Pooky said:
Nice picture, you have to look at it using 1024x768 resolution otherwise it looks funny, but that's probably just me.



What's USM?
Click to expand...
Unsharp mask.
 
Thanks for all the good feedback guys!

arf9999 said:
Handheld at 1/6s? If so, really impressive.
Click to expand...

Could easily have been - the shake reduction is that good. But alas no, I used a tripod.

Did you do any post editing? The sky colour is great.
Click to expand...

Not editing as such - just played with the temperature, tint and exposure in Camera Raw to correct the colour. It was quite yellow - AWB didn't work so well. It was taken just after sunset, so the sky was still a little blue-ish - not quite night yet.

bwana said:
Nice - cant fault much about it. I ran it through a USM though and it made a nice difference (I think most photos will benefit from it).
Click to expand...

What is USM?

BTW - check the difference between the full sized photo in Firefox as compared to Safari. (I'd use photoshops "save for web" next time if you want to avoid it. :D)
Click to expand...

I noticed that last night but I thought it was just because I had Safari and FF open on different monitors. What does "save for web" do different?

Pooky said:
Nice picture, you have to look at it using 1024x768 resolution otherwise it looks funny, but that's probably just me.
Click to expand...

I think that's just gallery not using the best settings to reduce the size. I'm not sure if it's tweakable, I'm still learning its ins and outs.
 
koffiejunkie said:
I noticed that last night but I thought it was just because I had Safari and FF open on different monitors. What does "save for web" do different?
Click to expand...
When you use save for web it doesnt embed the Color Profile [sic].

Mind if I use your pic to illustrate the difference for people who are puzzled by what we're talking about?
koffiejunkie said:
Aah, I'll go play with that :)
Click to expand...
A little goes a long way :)
 
bwana said:
When you use save for web it doesnt embed the Color Profile [sic].
Click to expand...

Just shows you - knowing too little can be dangerous :) I assumed embedding it is a good thing. So which browser honours the colour profile?

Mind if I use your pic to illustrate the difference for people who are puzzled by what we're talking about?A little goes a long way :)
Click to expand...

No problem at all, I can make the RAW file downloadable if you want to play with that - you'll prabably get way better results out of it than me :D
 
koffiejunkie said:
Just shows you - knowing too little can be dangerous :) I assumed embedding it is a good thing. So which browser honours the colour profile?
Click to expand...
Safari
koffiejunkie said:
No problem at all, I can make the RAW file downloadable if you want to play with that - you'll prabably get way better results out of it than me :D
Click to expand...
Here's what I mean by different - http://mybroadband.co.za/photos/showphoto.php?photo=2408&size=big&cat=503 :)

If you want me to fiddle around with your photo I wont say no. :)
 
I like the safari one better :)

I'll pm you the link - don't really want my gallery to get indexed via this forum...
 
Pooky said:
I like the top lighter blue one!
Click to expand...
In this case it has nothing to do with personal preference but which displays the photograph the way it was intended to be. ;)
 
Pooky said:
Which one displays it how it is supposed to be?
Click to expand...
In this case I'd say Safari.

nb - Keep in mind that comparison was quick and nasty and I had to compress the heck out of it to get it up on the gallery.
 
koffiejunkie said:
Wow, 9462x4734! I wonder what camera was used?

Very nice shot hough.
Click to expand...
Canon 5D with a 70-200mm f/2.8L at ~185mm, f14 and 3.2 seconds per exposure

or at least that's what it says in the description :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X