Noise, textures and layers results
View allAll Photos Tagged Results
I had photographed the moon before with really pretty mediocre results so decided to follow the advice in this article:
www.adobe.com/creativecloud/photography/hub/guides/moon-p...
It worked a treat. Some of the advice is common sense but there are lots of small things that all need to be considered. Low ISO, smallish aperture, tripod etc. The colorisation was done in Photoshop using a gradient map.
camera toss plus processing = fun
my initial foray into programmatic sources for camera toss, see this photo for a better description.
The effort (previous picture) paid off for this Red Tailed Hawk with a vole as a prize. As the juvenile Red Tailed Hawk took off with the vole it briefly landed on this fire hydrant marker across from where I was standing. Moments later he flew off to a tall tree nearby to finish off his dinner. Downsview Park, Toronto.
It's a handheld shot at 1/6 sec of two vehicles passing on a highway, for this week's Crazy Tuesday theme: "Something in Motion." What I can't figure out is why the vehicles themselves show motion blur, but the chrome on the wheels shows up as patterns instead of blur. I took several shots of different vehicles and they all came out the same way.
The only thing I can postulate is that maybe the autofocus function on the camera tried repeatedly to focus on the wheels as they turned(?). In any case, I sort of like the look; it gives the image a kind of sci fi or futuristic vibe for me.
HCT
Dibujando mi Barrio
La iglesia de San Gil Abad se encuentra en pleno centro de Zaragoza. De su existencia tenemos noticia desde el siglo XII cuando Alfonso I el Batallador, tras la reconquista de la ciudad en 1118, cede el templo de San Gil al obispo Esteban de Huesca para que con sus productos pueda mantener a las tropas bearnesas que habían ayudado en la conquista. Aunque no se tienen noticias ni quedan restos que lo puedan avalar es casi seguro que la primitiva fábrica de la iglesia fuese en estilo románico.
Al convertirse en parroquia en 1242 el aumento considerable de feligreses hace necesario el disponer de un templo con mayor capacidad que se levantará en la primera mitad del siglo XIV tras derribar el anterior.
Tal y como lo contemplamos hoy en día la fábrica de la iglesia es el resultado de la profunda reforma barroca realizada entre los años 1719 y 1725; esta reforma alteró por completo el interior pero respetó casi en su totalidad la estructura exterior.
La iglesia mudéjar estaba orientada al Este (esta orientación se modificó con la reforma barroca) y presentaba tipología de iglesia-fortaleza con nave única de dos tramos, cabecera recta y capillas laterales entre los contrafuertes.
La reforma barroca que alteró totalmente el interior no fue tan drástica con el exterior, donde prácticamente se redujo al derribo de la cabecera y hastial rectos sustituyéndolos por ábsides poligonales a la vez que se reorientaba litúrgicamente. De la fábrica mudéjar se conservan los dos laterales. En la última restauración se derribaron las edificaciones anexas a la fachada norte (actual calle Estébanes), quedando a la vista la torre principal, las dos torres-contrafuerte y las tribunas de este lado. En el lado meridional, aunque se conserva está misma estructura, queda totalmente enmascarada por las edificaciones anexas.
Las torres contrafuerte están divididas en dos cuerpos, el bajo hasta la altura del tejado de las capillas laterales y el superior hasta la del tejado de la nave central. Una sencilla cornisa a base de ménsulas en saledizo con una banda de esquinillas debajo, continuación de la que sirve de apoyo a los tejados citados, separa ambos cuerpos. Abren en la parte baja pequeñas aspilleras de iluminación mientras que en la superior lo hacen vanos en arco apuntado. Se rematan en cornisa a base de ménsulas en saledizo con banda de esquinillas en dientes de sierra debajo. Al interior presentan machón central y caja de escaleras que discurre entre éste y el muro exterior cubierta con bovedillas por aproximación de hiladas, distribución idéntica a la torre principal.
De toda la fábrica mudéjar la parte más aparente y que más llama la atención es la torre-campanario que se ve en la imagen.
Información extraída de:
So, I had kind of forgotten about this contest until Robot reminded me, so here are the results!
In first we have Wavy Films with his SINnoman Bun from Adventure Time. I really love this figure. It's very original and creative, and the paintwork is really clean.
In second, we have Comic Customs with his Owlman from that animated Juicy League movie. The paintwork is very clean, and I've never seen this figure made before.
In third, we have Ancient Robot Customs with his Toon Lonk. The whole figure is very accurate to Lonk, and the sculpting and paintwork are great.
So, y'all can just DM me on insta to tell me what you want.
I was honestly disappointed in quite a few of the entries that didn't at all fit under the rules of the contest. Y'all gotta read the rules that I put in place.
This time the Caspian Tern managed to catch a Catfish after diving into the pond. This is one of the series of shots that I took of it diving and taking off of water with the fish in its mouth. Good to see them back in our shores. It was a cloudy afternoon; however, a nice break from three days of continuous rain. Burlington, Ontario.
Doppelbelichtung mit einer selbst fotografierten Textur - bearbeitet mit overlay / 2 Bilder + digital Overlay
////
Double exposure with a self-photographed texture - edited with overlay / 2 images + digital overlay
== in Explore 12.9.2020 ( picture 79 ) ==
Thank you so much
After watching the storm clouds build for hours, it ended in this rain storm which also brought lightning and thunder.
... is complete rubbish.
I mean it is OK unless you look closely.
Outcome of the attempt to scan a slide with the contraption shown before.
The picture shows Yosemite valley seen from Glacier Point. I shot this in 2002 on Kodachrome.
This was the beautiful result following the cobweb creation, previously posted in this photostream, of my Actaea [Cimicifuga, Bugbane] which was quickly destroyed by local gusting breezes.
I must have had a lucky spider :-)
Best viewed on a black background
DT2F4358_FS_flickr
Net Results group of fishing nets stuck in a barrel just made an interesting arrangement, some vivid colors from the netting, found in North Carolina.
Don't use without permission of Bas Fransen
Twiter: @bas_fransen
Contact: info@basfransen.com
Website: www.basfransen.com
I really enjoyed my day out in my white socks that I didn't want to take them off after getting back to the hotel.
A pleasant day spent in the company of Dave McDigital was rounded off with this final shot of 1Z30 skirting Tanyard Bay below the cliffs of Bransty.
A little wordy here, sorry:
First: The Scherer article and my experiments of 2023 are WRONG. There is no fixed shim or extension that will match a Contax lens to a Nikon or vice versa. It was an interesting idea but it didn’t pan out.
Second: in my tests, the Contax and Nikon are exactly matched at infinity. The error only occurs as you focus closer.
The Nikon lens rotates farther than the Zeiss lens to reach a given focus distance. To go from infinity to its minimum focus of 5 feet, the Sonnar focus ring rotates 154.4 degrees; to get to the same point the Nikkor rotates 169.4 degrees, a difference of 15 degrees. This is not enough to be obvious just looking at the lenses, but it’s beyond the depth of field limit at f/32 with the 135mm telephoto - a very significant error.
On the other hand, since the lenses match at infinity, the error is very small at longer distances. Beyond 10-12 feet, the difference is within the wide open depth of field at f/3.5, and from 15 feet it’s less than I’m able to measure repeatably. The situation deteriorates rapidly as you go closer: at 8 feet you’ll need to be at f/8; f/16 at 7 feet, f/22 at 6 feet, and the smallest aperture of f/32 won’t be enough at five feet. The quick, easy, and frankly the only answer is to consider the 135 as having a minimum focus limit of 10-12 feet.
The actual distance error is very small, only about 4 inches at the five foot limit - but the depth of field is so small at that distance that it can’t cover anywhere near that amount.
Enough of the 135. What about wide angles?
The news here is actually very good. The 35mm wide angle will have the same 15 degree error at five feet on the focusing scale - but on the 35, the depth of field is enough to cover 21 degrees, even wide open at f/2.8. I wasn’t able to measure closer than five feet since that’s the minimum limit of the lenses I have to test, but this is a very promising situation. Shooting between 3 and 5 feet, stopping down to f/4, certainly f/5.6 ought to be plenty to keep you within the depth of field.
So, okay for wide and tele. What about the normal lens?
As close as I’m able to measure, the extension of the camera body focus helical is exactly the same between the Contax and the Nikon bodies - 3.55mm to three feet. The difference is just that the Nikon mount turns farther than the Contax to get there. This suggests that there is no difference between the actual 50mm normal lenses from Zeiss and Nikon. Since the focus mount for the normal lens is part of the body and not the lens, it’s correctly matched to the rangefinder regardless of which lens you have plugged into it. So for the 50, there should be no problem at all using a Sonnar on your Nikon or a Nikkor on your Contax.
All this tends to confirm the old conventional wisdom that the problem only affects tele lenses, something I was skeptical of until I went through this exercise. It does NOT confirm the idea that the Nikon normal lens was a different focal length from the Sonnar, leading to all this kerfuffle … the difference appears to be entirely due to a very slightly different thread pitch in the focus helical in the camera body. As for WHY Nikon would have done that, I have no idea. Maybe it was just a mistake that wasn’t discovered before they already had committed to their version of the mount.
So there it is. Have I verified all this on film? No, this is all based on measurements, and on the assumption that the engraved distance markings on the Zeiss and Nikon lens barrels are accurate. Frankly I doubt that my photography is precise enough to prove much at the very small distance differences involved here… I have more faith in the measurements than I would have in my negatives. But I will be doing some shooting, to see if the results correlate to these measurements.
Thinking of ordering PhenQ – wait till you have read this!
Trying to lose weight huh? Tell me about it. I have struggled with it for a really long time. After the birth of Evan, my second child – my body weight was all over the place.
more info phenq-results.com/
This image from near Wapanocca NWR in eastern Arkansas shows the flock of snow geese after they came up out of the field. I regret my lens could only get a small portion of them. Hundreds can be seen here but thousands were flying. The noise of all the honking was very audibly impressive; a real attention getter.